An Inland Bronze Age: Excavations at Striplands Farm, West Longstanton Christopher Evans and Ricky Patten, with Matt Brudenell and Maisie Taylor With contributions by Grahame Appleby, Steve Boreham, Vida Rajkovacˇa and Anne de Vareilles

The findings are outlined from the excavation of a later Early Medieval settlement features within that area, Bronze Age settlement located well ‘inland’ – respectively, this also revealed the western side of a small Middle/ 5 and 7km away from the Ouse and Cam River Valleys, later Iron Age enclosure (Hutton 2009). One of a and 6km back from the fen-edge – at Longstanton, where number of such sites in the greater Longstanton area it straddled the flanks of a gravel ridge running across the (Evans et al. 2008, 179, fig. 3.23), as its limited excava- Cambridgeshire clay plain. While given its rather piecemeal tion only produced 38 sherds of that date (and its fau- exposure, the site offers few major insights concerning the nal assemblage only amounting to c. 50 bones) it need period’s settlement generally, it nevertheless reflects upon a not further feature herein. number of crucial themes: the nature/chronology of ‘heavy Directly associated with Area A’s Saxo-Norman/ land’ colonisation and when its pioneering occurred, the key Medieval settlement, both linearly arranged quar- role of water provisioning and, due to localised depositional ry pits and paddock/field boundaries extended survival, middening dynamics. As regards the latter, the throughout the four other areas; whereas a system of site generated one of the region’s largest later Bronze Age Romano-British ditches were confined to only the two ceramic assemblages and, through waterlogged preserva- northernmost exposures (Areas D & E). As this pub- tion of its deep-cut pit-wells, yielded an important group of lication is not concerned with the Village’s long-term wooden artefacts and other finds. development, the evidence of these periods need not detain us. This being said, one of its later-phase fea- Lying between 6.5–8.5m OD and located at the inter- tures is of interest. Located at the junction of what was face between Ampthill Clay and Third Terrace gravels evidently ‘in’ and out-field dividing ditches (Fig. 3), (TL 53033/26790), the c. 4ha site was first discovered F.362 was a Saxo-Norman (Thetford Ware-associated) in 2004 during evaluation fieldwork relating to the well. This waterlogged feature, aside from yielding a Northstowe New Town/West Longstanton develop- group of important wooden artefacts – a wheel fel- ment (Fig. 1; Evans & Mackay 2004 and Evans et al. loe, cartside rail-top and a yoke – had very good pol- 2008, 174–81).1 It was then excavated between April len and, as will be shown below, by ‘village analogy’ and August of the following year (Patten & Evans this helps situate or inform our picture of the earlier, 2005). Due variously to protected hedge-lines and Bronze Age settlement. the location of power-cables, the site was fractured into five main areas (A–E; Figs. 2 & 3), with the subdi- vided central block (B–D) – where the bulk of its pre- Settlement Architecture and Organisation historic settlement lay – being the main exposure. At that time further trenching was undertaken, largely Before considering the character of the later Bronze to determine the extent of its Bronze Age settlement, Age settlement-phase, it warrants mention that the and this revealed still another large pit-well north of site’s flint assemblage attests to both Mesolithic/Early the cables that divided Areas D and E. Consequently, Neolithic and later Neolithic/Early Bronze Age back- this area was targeted for geophysical survey (by ground activity, albeit at a low/’incidental’ density Oxford Archaeotechnics), and in 2006 this resulted (see below); in addition, a single sherd of Beaker and in the excavation of a c. 225sqm area focussed upon four of Deverel Rimbury pottery were also recovered. that feature (Area 1; Mackay & Knight 2007). In addi- The basic components of the Bronze Age settlement tion, a new trench was cut to target another possible were those now known to be common to the ‘gram- anomaly, wherein a few associated minor settlement mar’ of the period’s settlements. In the main, its extent features were exposed (Area 2).2 would be marked by the distribution of its pit-wells Relating to the sale of the land, July 2009 saw the over some 1.7ha (they clearly did not continue across final stage of excavation along its southern road-side the southern two-thirds of Area B and, beyond that, end (Area A; Fig. 2). Though primarily directed to- into Area A; Figs. 2 & 3). Lying, however, west beyond wards the completion of the dense Saxo-Norman/ this, in Area E, were a four-poster granary (Structure

Proceedings of the Cambridge Antiquarian Society C pp. 7–45 8 Christopher Evans and Ricky Patten Striplands Farm, West Longstanton, location maps with Northstowe/Longstanton evaluation sites indicated on detail right. Figure 1. Figure An Inland Bronze Age: Excavations at Striplands Farm, West Longstanton 9

Figure 2. Site Base-plan.

I; 2.4 x 2.6m) and, also, the axes of an ‘L’-shaped ditch other less well-defined posthole settings surely oc- paddock, with another possible ditch length (F.506) – curred within that area. only tentatively assigned as ‘early’ based on alignment In order to provide a sense of comparable context (and not positive dating evidence) – exposed in Area 1. for the site’s pits/wells, the same size-categories that Given this, the settlement would then have extended were employed in the recent analyses of Fengate’s over, at least, 2.7ha; it only being its southern limits Bronze Age settlements have been used (A–D; Evans that, at this time, we can be relatively assured of. et al. 2009, 70–2, 152, fig. 3.5 and table 4.9). As plot- As marked by its array of posthole settings and ted in Fig. 5, they were generally quite large, with small pits, the settlement’s core clearly fell within two-thirds of the site’s 51 such features being greater Area D (Fig. 4), though it surely extended north of this than 1.4m across and more than 0.5m deep (Fig. 5). point and beyond the line of the power cables. Amid Of the total, 11 were more than 1.0m deep and, for the spread of such minor features within it, a series our immediate purposes here, these have – if rather of structural configurations were distinguished. arbitrarily – been categorised as wells. As is apparent Least obvious, despite their designation as Structure in Table 1, these features yielded the majority of the III, was the posthole cluster around and within the settlement’s finds. upper profile of the large pit-well, F.210. Also appar- Other ent there was a possible (‘-only’) longhouse, Structure Pits Wells Total IV. Extending over 3.9 x 7.8m, this could be compared Features 425 3867 25 4317 to similar settings found at both Barleycroft Farm Pottery (5426g) (35280g) (85g) (40791g) and Tanholt Farm, Eyebury (see Evans et al. 2009, 51, 1101 6363 116 7580 Bone 53–5, fig. 2.17). Also distinguished was a porched, (4350g) (48060g) (549g) (52959g) 6m-diameter roundhouse (Structure II). This lay on 13 528 6 547 Flint the western side of a dense posthole spread, which (140g) (4873g) (6g) (5019g) clearly included a west/northwest-east/southeast ori- ented fence-line, and probably had other four-posters Table 1. Artefact frequency by feature-type along its northern side. It is possible to identify other short ‘fence-type’ alignments and, on the whole, Of the site’s wells, having depths in excess of 1.3m, 10 Christopher Evans and Ricky Patten

Figure 3. Base-plan (detail), Bronze Age Settlement Features. five were extensively waterlogged. These also yielded sandy silts. Though the wooden items were recovered from the basal fills, pottery was only retrieved from the the majority of its non-organic finds, with the vast upper two deposits; a large occipital and left parietal bulk deriving from the midden deposits within the human skull fragments also occurred within the lower upper profiles of F.210 and F.504/526 (Table 2). of these fills. It is appropriate that the salient characteristics of F.71–73/F.156 (Figs. 3, 6 & 22): This initially appeared as an the highlighted features be presented in some detail: irregular-shaped feature, c. 9.25m long and 7.0m wide. F.13 (Figs. 3 & 6): Some 6.0m wide, while this could not be Excavation identified four distinct features/re-cuts. The completely exposed it was excavated to its full depth of earliest, F.156, was severely truncated and survived to 1.35m. It had steep sides with a gradual break of slope a depth of 0.65m; having steep sides (the southeastern to a concave base on the eastern side, with sharp, almost undercut) and a uniformly flat base, it contained a grey- right-angled breaks of slope on the southern and western green silt. This was succeeded by F.72, c. 1.9m in diam- sides. A distinct step and flattened area was also present eter and 1.0m deep. Also severely truncated, F.72 had a in the northeast base of the feature at 0.7m depth. Into near-vertical northern side, steep sides on the southern this had been set a horizontal log, retained in position by edge and a flat base. Its fills consisted of sandy rede- a series of vertical stakes, probably creating an access- posited natural ‘slump’, blue-grey silty clay and a dark staging point into the well. Of the feature’s seven fills, brown organic-rich deposit; the latter two contained wa- the uppermost consisted primarily of dark grey clayey terlogged wood, including a log ladder. Truncating both sand, with the mid and lower deposits composed of light these features was F.71, c. 5.2m in diameter and 1.3m grey sandy clays grading to waterlogged blue or black deep, which had steep sides and an uneven/flat base.

Width Length Depth Wooden F. No. Pottery Bone Flint Burnt Flint (m) (m) (m) Artefacts 13 6.05 - 1.35 40 (26g) 147 (1459g) 7 (89g) - Bark box 2 Axe hafts 71-3/156 7.0 9.25 1.53 30 (293g) 1004 (15644g) 20 (258g) 1 (42g) Withy 1 LL 210 1102 (12325g) 1684 (13194g) 25 (181g) 49 (824g) 3 LL (+ forked 5.2 7.25 2.6 Midden 1088 (12234g) 1543 (11353g) 23 (174g) 49 (824g) ‘lift’/ladder) 370 3.25 3.5 2.15 40 (372g) 83 (237g) 1 (9g) - 1 Axe haft 1 LL 504/526 2499 (21000g) 3284 (17935g) 458 (4319g) 890 (11722g) 7.25 8.5 3.00 Trough 5 LL Midden 2483 (20882g) 2340 (7611g) 403 (3436g) 855 (10468g) Total 3711 6202 511 940

Table 2. Waterlogged pit-well assemblages (‘LL’ indicates log ladder). An Inland Bronze Age: Excavations at Striplands Farm, West Longstanton 11 Base-plan, Area A, with possible four-poster settings indicated on inset. Figure Figure 4. 12 Christopher Evans and Ricky Patten Depth (metres)

Length (metres)

Figure 5. Bronze Age Pit Dimensions Plot.

Figure 6. Pit-well Imagery (I): left, F.13, general shot (top) and, below, detail of revetment/staging, with the bark box/step (WD40) in situ in upper right corner (see Fig. 17); right, F.71-3/156, with detail of basal timbers below. See also Plate 1. An Inland Bronze Age: Excavations at Striplands Farm, West Longstanton 13

It contained eight fills, the majority of the pottery and 5.2m wide, and was excavated to a depth of 2.6m. It sides bone was recovered from the upper two, with two cow sloped gradually from the top, and then broke sharply skulls also found near the top, seemingly placed to ‘face’ into near-vertical sides in the western and northern sec- outwards. In the main, its deposits were light to mid tors to a flat base. A distinct sloping basal ‘ledge’ (c. 1.6m blue-grey clay silt, grey sandy silt with occasional gravel diam.) was present in the northeastern quadrant, which and light grey clay; secondary and basal fills were dark had traces of wattle revetting, consisting of horizontal brown to grey sandy silts, blue-grey silty sand and grey rods woven around a series of vertical stakes (grouped silt. Its secondary basal fill was of special note, contain- in threes); a fragment of an earlier log ladder was found ing a large quantity of worked wood cuttings (including in slumped deposits behind the revetting. On abandon- axe hafts), the majority dumped on the northern side of ment, a fragment of tree-trunk and a further log ladder the feature; five pierced freshwater mussels were also were discarded within this revetted-ledge area. Having recovered (Fig. 20). Abutting the northern edge of F.71 14 distinct fills and slumped horizons, these mainly con- was pit-well F.73, c. 4.2m in diameter and 0.89m deep, sisted of light brown to grey-orange sandy clay near the with steep sides and a flat base; the upper three fills were top, to dark orange sandy and blue-grey silty clay to- contiguous with those of F.71, with the remaining depos- wards the middle; in its lower profile/base were dark its consisting of light grey or blue silty sand with moder- grey clays (some with a silt component) and sandy clays ate gravel and slumped natural at the northern end, and with organic material. Only a relatively minor quantity from which no finds were recovered. of finds were recovered from the lower horizons, the vast F.210 (Figs. 4, 7 & 8): This was 7.25m long and a minimum of majority of its finds being retrieved from 0.5m thick dark

Figure 7. F.210, Plan and Section. 14 Christopher Evans and Ricky Patten

Figure 8. Pit-well Imagery (II): left, F.210, with Structure III postholes revealed in its top following excavation of midden horizon (top) and, below, timber in base; right, F.504/526, initial midden strata quadrant-sample grid (top) and, below, excavation in progress with the construction of Longstanton's B1050 bypass-road looming behind.

brown-grey silt midden layer that sealed the entire fea- to a near-vertical edge in the northwest and a flat base. ture. It was upon the removal of this horizon that the Shaft-like in appearance, the lower fills were difficult to postholes of Structure III were exposed, but as is appar- excavate due to flooding; the fills consisting of pale grey ent within its section (Fig. 7), these clearly had been in- to silver sandy silts interrupted by lenses of dark black- serted ‘within’ it. brown organic silts. Within the fills were clumps of pre- F.370 (Fig. 4): This 2.15m deep sub-circular feature (3.50 x served leaf matter, three log ladders and a small quantity 3.25m) possessed initially shallow-sloping sides, with of animal bone. Located immediately to the northwest sharp breaks of slope down to uneven, very steep sides of F.526 was F.525. One metre in diameter and surviv- and an irregular base. It had grey or brown sandy silt ing to a depth of c. 0.5m, this had a rounded base, steep fills with some organic material, and a rich black-brown sides and also contained a log ladder, positioned cen- basal deposit with much well-preserved organic mate- trally to give access from the northwestern aspect, whilst rial, including a log ladder and axe haft. Of the pottery the northeastern edge was pierced by a small wooden and bone, the vast majority was recovered from the stake; it was filled with a dark grey-brown gritty clay silt. upper fills, although a small amount of pottery was also Situated on the northern side of the main feature was a retrieved from the same deposit as the afore-mentioned severely truncated circular pit F.531, 0.5m in diameter wooden artefacts. and 0.5m deep, and from which no finds were forthcom- F.504/526 (Figs. 3, 8–10): This large oval-shaped watering- ing. A single, ‘boggy’ spread ([1265]) sealed these earlier hole was 7.25m wide, 8.5m long and up to 3m deep. re-cuts and consisted of preserved fragments of small Initially a c. 2m wide pit or well (F.530; only the lower- branches and twigs; found within its matrix were both most 0.4m survived), this was sub-rectangular in shape a crudely worked wooden trough and the articulated and had steep to near-vertical sides and a flat base. Its front legs of a wild boar. This was covered by a 0.35m dark and mid grey sandy clay fill contained the remains thick horizon of iron-panned orange clay ([1275]), seal- of a collapsed wooden tripod structure constructed from ing the lower waterlogged deposits. Feature 517, some three worked logs, two with mortises. Truncated in the 0.8m in diameter and 0.9m deep with vertical sides and southeast quadrant by F.526, this 2.4 x 1.9m and 1.75m rounded base, cut into the waterlogged deposit, expos- deep feature penetrated below the watertable. It had ing the stake in F.525. This, in turn, was sealed by a cap- steep to near-vertical irregular sides on the southeastern ping deposit ([1208]). Composed of homogenous dark side, with a shallow slope and sharp break of slope down grey and black clay silt with an ashy texture, this also An Inland Bronze Age: Excavations at Striplands Farm, West Longstanton 15

Figure 9. F.504/526, Plan and Section.

covered lower fills of mid yellow grey-brown clay-silts Only two other features otherwise warrant notice. (containing a fragment of saddle quern and a possible Located along the northern edge of Area C (southwest rubbing stone) and from it was recovered great quanti- of F.13; Fig. 3), F.63 was a circular pit, c. 0.85m across ties of the pottery, animal bone, flint and burnt flint, fired and 0.45m deep, with vertical sides and a flat base. clay and stone. It had two dark sandy clay-matrix fills, the upper 1616 Christopher Evans and Ricky Patten

Figure 10. F.504/526 Wood in situ. including a 0.12m thick lens of charcoal and much small size (most 10–20mm) precluded identification burnt stone. A distinct collection of finds appeared beyond ‘sub-adult/adult’. Interestingly, food remains deposited within it: a collapsed, largely complete pot- offerings may have been part of its rite and, possibly tery vessel (see Brudenell, below), a large loomweight resonating with pit-well F.71’s mussel shell necklace, and a saddle quern fragment. The other feature of fragments of shell were also recovered from this fea- note, a cremation (F.2), also occurred within the same ture (the only other context in which such shells oc- area (Fig. 3). Set in a c. 0.45m diameter pit (0.23m curred; see de Vareilles below). deep), this had 225g of white-burnt/-calcined human Of the settlement’s broader depositional pattern- bone fragments. As reported upon by Dodwell, their ing, virtually no finds were forthcoming from the An Inland Bronze Age: Excavations at Striplands Farm, West Longstanton 17 post-built structures within Area D (apart from those were both hand-excavated in metre-squares; how- of Structure III associated with F.210’s midden) and ever, in the case of F.504, only the southern half was only very little Bronze Age material was present in re- entirely dug in this manner, the northern only being sidual status from the later-phase features there. This tested by single metre-units in the centre of each was in some contrast to Area E, where a higher den- quadrant on that side (and, otherwise, hand-dug en sity of prehistoric material occurred: 70 fragments of masse). The so-recovered densities were high: more bone within the ditches of the ‘L’-shaped paddock and than 100 bone fragments and sherds per metre in the some 50 sherds of pottery in its Romano-British and case of F.210 and, for F.504, the highest values were in Saxo-Norman features. This, on the one hand, might excess of 250 per metre. attest to another, more westerly settlement focus, but Another point should be raised concerning the which lacked accompanying post-built houses. On the pit-wells’ artefact assemblages and that is the dispro- other hand, its somewhat higher general-area finds portionate representation of both worked and burnt density could actually reflect settlement-marginal ac- flint within F.504 in the north. This must essentially tivity, which evidently was not subject to formal mid- relate to the recovery of earlier ceramics from that dening; whereas most of the material relating to Area area of the site alone, which included a probable D’s occupation went directly into organised middens Beaker sherd from F.504 itself and four small Deverel (and subsequently redeposited within F.210; see e.g. Rimbury sherds from pit F.505 within the same McOmish 1996, Needham & Spence 1997, Brudenell & trench. This would suggest that the traces of earlier/ Cooper 2008 and Sharples 2010, 52–3 concerning the Middle Bronze Age occupation had been scraped up period’s middening dynamics generally). from the ground surface, mixed with later Bronze As shown in Fig. 11, the two pit-wells’ middens Age ceramics and redeposited within that feature.

Figure 11. Midden Deposit Densities (F.210 & F.504/526). 18 Christopher Evans and Ricky Patten

Before proceeding, some general remarks concern- its eastern side (which appears to have been a reused ing the role and operation of such pit-wells are neces- ‘box’; WD40, see below). Instances of pegged ‘stag- sary. Though some comparable features are known ing’ well-settings have recently been found associ- in later Neolithic/earlier Bronze Age contexts (e.g. ated with both Langtoft and Thorney’s fieldsystems Webley & Hiller 2009), large pit-wells/watering-holes (Hutton 2008a & b; Mudd & Pears 2008, 33–47); par- seem essentially a Middle/later Bronze Age phe- ticularly, a ‘door-step’ access-entry arrangement in nomenon.3 Found on almost every ‘fieldsystem-land- one of the latter’s features (Daniel 2009, 50, fig. 3.43). scape’ within the region (see Yates 2007, 82-100 and The crucial point is that it appears that you would Evans et al. 2009, 42–66 for overview), they deserve have actually clambered into the pit-wells to get to be counted amongst the great ‘inventions’ of later water, either negotiating passage directly down their prehistory as they facilitated permanent settlement sides or gained them via log ladders (alternatively, in diverse locales. Without them, as is still the case in, of course, a roped bucket could have always been for example, much of sub-Saharan Africa today, daily tossed in from above and two such buckets were re- water would still have been achieved through rou- covered from Thorney’s features; Mudd & Pears 2008, tine tasking – fetching water from natural springs, 52, fig. 32; Daniel 2009, 114–7, fig. 5.1). As opposed to brooks, ponds or rivers – or, otherwise, settlements ‘waterhole pits’, ‘ponds’ have also been distinguished would have had have been sited immediately beside within Thorney’s Bronze Age landscape; presumed these sources (i.e. tolerating low damp-ground con- to respectively relate to human and stock-watering ditions). This is as true for animals as humans, for sources, the latter are generally larger and held to without such watering-hole wells stock would daily have had direct ramp-access down the broader slopes have been driven to water. of one of their sides (Daniel 2009, 46–51, figs. 3.40–.44; Although dependent upon their proximity to con- Mudd & Pears 2008, 39 & 46, figs. 27 & 34).4 temporary settlement, on their abandonment these usually large features can be backfilled with a rich array of often waterlogged materials arising from Dating Evidence their immediate usage/function, and the domestic matrix of their associated households. In fact, given The settlement’s dating presented something of a di- that Bronze Age house-evidence is often slight – lemma. On the one hand, the depth of accumulated amounting to only a scattering of postholes – in terms infill within pit-wells F.504/526 and F.210 prior to of ‘closed’ material culture assemblages, Middle/ the deposition of their respective midden-cappings later Bronze Age pit-wells can be considered as near- suggested considerable time-depth. Yet, on the other equivalent substantive ‘period packages’ as eavesgul- hand, aside from the site’s few Beaker and Deverel ly-surrounded Middle Iron Age roundhouses. Rimbury sherds, only Late Bronze Age wares were As to the operation of such pit-wells, unsurpris- recovered from them and which – albeit in low num- ingly, the site’s features display variety. On the one bers – also occurred at depth within the pit-wells’ hand, there is F.210’s wattling and F.13’s single stake- profiles. It was in an effort to resolve this that a robust set log. Against this, on the other hand, F.504/526 series of radiocarbon samples were submitted, with showed no real evidence of any revetting per se, but as the following dates achieved: further outlined by Taylor below, its wooden artefacts – variously, large trimmed forked branches and mor- 1) Beta-280343 (SFW05-[136]/F.13) – 2850±40BP/1120–910 tised timbers – could suggest a ‘mechanical’ means cal. BC to take water (Fig. 10). This may have been due to the 2) Beta-280344 (SFW05-[468]/F.71) – 3600±40BP/2110–2100 much greater depth and steep-sided form of F.526, and 2040–1880 cal. BC which extended for more than a metre below the base 3) Beta-280345 (SFW05-[649]/F.210) – 2680±40BP/910–790 of the originally broad, F.504 version. In fact, by its cal. BC profile it is the F.526 well-form that is unusual and 4) Beta-280346 (SFW05-[1062]/F.210) – 2800±40BP/1040–840 actually seems almost akin to later types, such as the cal. BC 5) Beta-280347 (SFW05-[1009]/F.370) – 2800±40BP/1040–840 much deeper, often box frame-revetted constructions cal. BC of Romano-British times, and which clearly required 6) Beta-280349 (SFW06-[1282]/F.530) – 2990±40BP/1380– mechanical means to lift water out. In contrast, most 1330 and 1330–1120 cal. BC later Bronze Age wells were obviously ‘broad’ (i.e. 7) Beta-286572 (SFW06-[1208]/F.504) – 2870±40BP/1190–1140 not steep-sided) and, frequently recut, this usually and 1140–920 cal. BC. resulted in irregularly stepped profiles. In this capacity, the arrangement of F.13 seems In addition, one other sample, from F.504 ([1208]; Beta- to have been the most commonplace. Essentially 280348), was submitted; unfortunately, its animal amounting to little more than a horizontally pegged bone failed to yield sufficient collagen for a result. timber (Fig. 6), while such settings would have sure- Otherwise, all of the dates are considered ‘acceptable’, ly held back accumulated basal ‘muck’, at the same apart from the second, Beta-280344, from F.71. Unlike time they would have provided a staging against/ the others, which derived from either charred cereal on which an individual could have supported them- remains or wood (with Beta-286572 from food resi- selves while obtaining water; in that case, the ‘staging dues on a sherd), that was the only other animal bone level’ was achieved by the distinct bark-lined step on sample and clearly it has produced an assay some An Inland Bronze Age: Excavations at Striplands Farm, West Longstanton 19

groups with grog (<1%), quartz sand (2%), quartz/quartzite 600–500 years too young. That said, while not com- (2%), or a combination of grog and flint (3%), flint and chalk ing from where the Beaker/Deverel Rimbury sherds (<1%), and flint, quartz/quartzite and grog (5%). were recovered, it is certainly possible that this bone was ‘old’ and of residual status within the later pit- Burnt Flint Fabrics well (i.e. relates to the landscape’s Early Bronze Age F1: Moderate–common medium and coarse burnt background). Therefore, excluding it as an ‘outlier’ flint (mainly 2–4mm in size). The clay matrix can and starting with the F.530 sample (from the primary also contain rare, sparse or moderate sand, and some basal-form of F.504/526), they suggest that the site’s sherds possibly contain glauconitic inclusions ‘well-related’ occupation began in 13/12th centuries F2: Sparse medium and coarse burnt flint (mainly BC and continued until, at least, the 9th century, with 2–4mm size); clay matrix as in F1 F3: Moderate–common medium burnt flint (mainly the brunt of its usage probably spanning the later 1–2mm in size); clay matrix as in F1 11th through to the 9th centuries BC; the majority of F4: Sparse medium burnt flint (mainly 1–2mm size); the pottery probably deriving from the end of this clay matrix as in F1 span (see Brudenell, below). F5: Moderate–common fine burnt flint (<1.5mm); clay matrix as in F1 F6: Rare–sparse fine burnt flint (<1.5mm); clay ma- Material Culture trix as in F1 F: Generic category for sherds with burnt flint inclu- Due to restrictions of space, only the most relevant sions too small to assign to a numbered fabric group artefact assemblages – pottery and wood – are report- Burnt Flint and Chalk Fabrics ed in detail, with the remainder of the settlement’s FCH1: Sparse–moderate medium flint (mainly Bronze Age finds only being summarised. 1–2mm) and sparse medium and coarse chalk (1– 3mm) Late Bronze Age Pottery Matt Brudenell Burnt Flint, Quartz/Quartzite and Grog Fabrics FQIG1: Sparse–moderate fine burnt flint, quartz/ A substantial quantity of Late Bronze Age pottery was quartzite and grog (<1.5mm) in a slightly sandy clay recovered, totalling 4153 sherds (41079g), with a mean matrix sherd weight of 9.9g. To date this is the largest group of Late Bronze Age Plainware PDR (Post-Deverel Grog Fabrics G1: Sparse–common medium to coarse grog (1– Rimbury) pottery published from Cambridgeshire, 3mm) in a slightly sandy clay matrix and represents a regionally important assemblage in direct association with a series of high precision Grog and Burnt Flint Fabrics Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (AMS) radiocarbon GF1: Sparse–moderate medium to coarse grog dates. For regional ceramic studies, the two most im- (1–3mm) and sparse to moderate medium and/or portant groups are unquestionably those deriving coarse flint (1–4mm) in a slightly sandy clay matrix from the artefact-rich ‘midden’ dumps capping fills GF2: Moderate–common fine grog (<1.5mm) and of pit-wells F.210 and F.504. Accounting for some 79% sparse to moderate medium flint (1–2mm) in a of the total assemblage (by weight), these deposits are slightly sandy clay matrix deservedly the focus of this report, with the rest of the Quartz Sand Fabrics feature-groups receiving only summary treatment. All Q1: Sparse quartz sand the pottery has, however, been fully recorded follow- Q2: Moderate–common quartz sand; some quite ing the recommendations laid out by the Prehistoric abrasive. The clay matrix may contain rare mica Ceramic Research Group (PCRG 1997), and is further Q3: Moderate quartz sand and sparse linear voids detailed in the author’s doctoral thesis (in prep.). from burnt out vegetable matter

Assemblage Characteristics Quartz/Quartzite Fabrics The comparatively wide range of Late Bronze Age fabrics QI1: Moderate–common medium and coarse quartz/ identified reflects the site’s location within a locally diverse quartzite (mainly 2–4mm in size). The clay matrix geological landscape, in which potters could have had ac- can also contain sparse or moderate sand, and sparse cess to a variety of potential clay sources and tempering mica flecking inclusions. As is however characteristic of PDR ceramic tra- QI2: Moderate–common medium quartz/quartzite (mainly 1–2mm in size); clay matrix as in QI1 dition in this part of Cambridgeshire and much of Eastern QI3: Sparse–moderate medium and coarse quartz/ England, crushed burnt flint was the favoured ingredient quartzite (mainly 2–4mm in size); clay matrix as in in fabric recipes; the grade and density varying along the QI1 spectrum of coarse to fine and common to sparse, linked largely to the quality of the ware and vessel size. By weight, Shell Fabrics 75% of the pottery had burnt flint inclusions (F1–F6); domi- S1: Moderate–common medium to coarse shell nant amongst which was coarseware Fabric F1 (Table 3). (mainly 2–4mm) Shelly wares, probably deriving from the local Ampthill or S2: Spare–common medium shell (mainly 1–2mm) Kimmeridge Clay sources, accounted for 12% of the pot- S3: Spare–common fine shell (<1.5mm) tery (9% shell; 2% shell and sand; 1% shell and burnt flint). S: Generic category for sherds with shell inclusions The remaining 13% was shared amongst the ‘minor fabric’ too small to assign to a numbered fabric group 20 Christopher Evans and Ricky Patten

high rounded shoulders and short upright rims (Form F); Shell and Quartz Sand Fabrics jars with marked shoulders and hollowed necks (Form H), SQ1: Moderate–common medium and coarse shell and a handful of vessels with bipartite and tub-shaped pro- (mainly 2–4mm) in a fine sandy clay matrix files (Forms D & E). The jars occurred in three sizes: small SQ2: Sparse–common fine and medium shell (<2mm) vessels with rims diameters of 12–17cm; medium vessels in a fine sandy clay matrix measuring 18–27cm, and large to very large vessels measur- ing 30–37cm (Fig. 13). Carbonised residues were only identi- Shell and Burnt Flint Fabrics fied on small and medium-sized jars, suggests these vessels SF1: Sparse–common medium to coarse shell (main- primarily served as cooking pots (residues were recorded ly 2–4mm) and sparse medium to coarse flint (main- on a total of 206 sherds; 4143g). The two burnished fineware ly 2–4mm) jars (Class II, Forms A & G) in the assemblage were possibly SF2: Moderate–common fine shell (<1.5mm) and serving vessels, and also fell into the small- and medium-size sparse medium to coarse flint (mainly 2–4mm) range category. SF3: Sparse–moderate fine shell (<1.5mm) and sparse medium flint (mainly 1–2mm) Although only 12 bowls were identified, the three most Based on the total number of different rims and bases common types were simple open bowls with a broadly hemi- identified, the assemblage represents a minimum of 327 ves- spherical profile (Form J); round-bodied bowls with upright sels, with an Estimated Vessel Equivalent (EVE) of 22.8 (222 or everted rims (Form K), and shouldered bowls with hol- different rims, 102 different bases and three complete ves- lowed or concave necks (Form L). There were also two exam- sel profiles). As regards vessel forms, the assemblage was ples of tripartite bowls with short everted, taped rims (Form composed of a range of jars, bowls and cups types typical N). The bowl rim diameters all measured between 12–17cm: of Late Bronze Age ceramic groups from across southern the un-burnished coarseware varieties (Class III, Forms K, J, Britain (Barrett 1980). In total, 68 vessels were sufficiently L) ranging between 12–15cm; the burnished finewares (Class intact to allow ascription to form (Table 4). This included IV, Forms J–N) between 14–17cm. The seven identified cups 268 sherds (6274g), representing 6% of the assemblage by in the assemblage ranged from simple open vessels with sherd count, or 15% by weight. Un-burnished coarseware straight flared walls, through to cups with bulbous bodies jars (Fig. 12, Class I) dominated, notably weakly shouldered and everted rims; all were from 7–10cm in diameter. vessels (Form G), and ellipsoid or barrel-shaped jars with The scarcity of form-assigned fineware from Striplands everted, upright, slightly in-turned or ‘hooked’ rims (Forms reflects the general paucity of burnished sherds amongst the B & C). These were accompanied by a variety of jars with assemblage overall. In total, just 221 sherds retained traces

% fabric No./wt. (g) MNV Fabric No./wt. (g) sherds % of fabric burnished MNV burnished burnished (by wt.) F 239/363 0.9 1/6 1.7 11 1 F1 2225/25751 62.7 9/69 0.3 157 2 F2 169/1704 4.1 -/- - 18 - F3 163/1140 2.8 49/480 42.1 27 12 F4 107/700 1.7 13/81 11.6 10 1 F5 123/635 1.5 82/413 65.0 15 9 F6 79/483 1.2 27/101 20.9 15 7 FCH1 8/301 0.7 -/- - 1 - FQIG1 148/2060 5.0 -/- - 2 - G1 29/160 0.4 -/- - 4 - GF1 53/785 1.9 -/- - 10 - GF2 63/598 1.5 2/21 3.5 1 - Q1 57/191 0.5 9/23 12.0 7 2 Q2 51/383 0.9 17/141 36.8 4 1 Q3 15/152 0.4 2/14 9.2 5 - QI1 77/869 2.1 1/5 0.6 6 1 QI2 16/122 0.3 -/- - 1 - S 47/67 0.2 -/- - - - S1 287/2714 6.6 1/20 0.7 9 - S2 93/599 1.5 ½ 0.3 12 - S3 11/105 0.3 4/25 23.8 1 1 SF1 14/166 0.4 -/- - 1 - SF2 14/168 0.4 -/- - 1 - SF3 16/256 0.6 -/- - 2 - SQ1 31/278 0.7 -/- - 2 - SQ2 18/329 0.8 3/193 58.6 5 2 Total 4153/41079 100.1 221/1594 3.9 327 39 Table 3. Fabric frequency and the relationship to burnishing and vessel counts (MNV = minimum number of vessels, calculated as the total number of different rims and bases). An Inland Bronze Age: Excavations at Striplands Farm, West Longstanton 21

No. Rim diam. Form Brief description No. Vessel Burnished (cm) A Jar, round shoulder, constricted neck 1 1 16 B Jar, ellipsoid, upright or in-turned/hooked rim 11 - 17-20 C Jar, ovoid or barrel-shaped, upright or everted rim 3 - 20-34 D Jar, tub-shaped, weakly defined neck 2 - ? E Jar, bipartite 2 - 25 F Jar, high rounded shoulder 7 - 12-32 G Jar, weakly shouldered, upright or hollowed neck 18 1 12-30 H Jar, marked shoulder, hollowed or concave neck 5 - 18-36 J Bowl, open, broadly hemispherical 4 2 14-17 K Bowl, round-bodied 3 2 12-16 L Bowl, shouldered, hollowed or concave neck 3 2 14 N Bowl, tripartite, angular shoulder, short everted rim 2 2 14 Q Cup, flared walls 1 - 10 R Cup, hemispherical 1 1 ? S Cup, ellipsoid 2 - 7-10 T Cup, round or bulbous body, everted or upright m 2 1 7 X Cup, tripartite 1 - 10 Total - 68 12 -

Table 4. Quantification of vessel forms. of the burnishing, representing 5.3% of the assemblage by 15.19). Intriguingly, both also had pre-firing perforations sherd count or 3.9% by weight. Whilst these figures were along this zone; only some of which penetrated right the initially thought to be unusual, patterns now emerging from way through the vessel wall. It is debateable whether this Cambridgeshire and other parts of East Anglia suggest that constitutes decoration; the holes could, otherwise, serve as a coarseware dominated assemblages are the norm in this means of hanging the vessels, or attaching fabric or leather region (Brudenell 2008, 38). The burnished finewares are, lids. Similar pre-firing perforations were also identified on therefore, likely to constitute a specialised tableware, used, two other vessel necks (Figs. 14.25 & 15.21), and a combined broken and discarded much more infrequently than their total of 13 sherds (172g, not included in the decoration total coarseware counterparts. Given the time and skill needed to above). Only three burnished fineware sherds were orna- produce these thin-walled finewares, it is even tenable that mented (14g). Two refitted and retained traces of two lightly some acquired a status beyond that of mere serving/eating incised horizontal lines (Fig. 14.21). The other sherd belonged receptacles, and were perhaps used and deposited in a more to a rim of a cup or bowl, and was ornamented with shallow restricted range of social contexts. Certainly, the fineware furrowing on the neck (Fig. 15.26) – a treatment similar to bowl seems the most likely candidate as a ‘status’ ceramic that present on the published vessel from Maidscroft, Suffolk in the Late Bronze Age, becoming increasingly standardised (Needham 1995). in form and decoration in the period after 800 BC, leading to the emergence of regionalised ceramic styles-zones (Cunliffe 1974). Deposition and Midden Contexts Decoration was present on 75 sherds (822g), represent- Pottery was recovered from 125 contexts relating to 93 fea- ing a maximum of 41 vessels. Leaving aside an elaborately tures (Table 5), including pits, postholes, wells and 21 later ornamented cup, decorated with geometric tooling on the ditches and hollows (85 residual sherds; 388g). The small and exterior, and two incised horizontal lines on the interior rim- medium-sized feature assemblages contained between 1–36 edge (Fig. 15.20), applications to the un-burnished coarse- sherds each (median, two sherds), with MSWs ranging from ware were primarily confined to a single row of fingertip or 0.5–27g (5.3g median). Most of these assemblages contained tool marks made along the rim-top, neck, or more rarely, the small and relatively abraded sherds; the majority, perhaps, shoulder. Overall, 20 of the 196 different coarseware rims in being unintentionally caught in dumps of soil during fea- the assemblage displayed some form of ornamentation, rep- ture infilling. In this instance, the only assemblages worthy resenting 10%. Such low frequencies are characteristic of PDR of more detailed comment are the six large-sized feature de- Plainware assemblages, and are matched by figures from posits from pits F.63 and F.161, and pit-wells F.11, F.13, F.210 other contemporary groups in Cambridgeshire (Brudenell and F.504. 2008, 38). Three plain and decorated cordons were also re- The assemblages from pits F.63 (117 sherds; 2290g) and covered from the excavations, all applied to vessel shoul- F.161 (43 sherds; 537g) owe their size to the inclusion of sub- ders (Fig. 14.12). The only pots to display multiple rows of stantial fragments of two broken, but near-complete, jars. decoration were two jars: one with a tooled rim-exterior and With the exception of five sherds, all the pottery from pit linear stab-marks on the neck (Fig. 14.4); the other with a F.161 belonged to a decorated, medium-sized coarseware jar tooled rim-top and fingertip impressed neck surrounded by (Form C), which had been partially burnt post-breakage (Fig. crudely incised lines, seemingly executed with a stick (Fig. 14.5). A collapsed, but near-complete, medium-sized jar had 22 Christopher Evans and Ricky Patten

Top, Figure 12. Vessel Classes (after Barrett 1980): I) coarseware jars; II) burnished fineware jars; III) coarseware bowls; IV) burnished fineware bowls; V) cups.

Below, Figure 13. Diameter of all measurable vessel rims (48 by vessel count).

Right, Figure 14. Late Bronze Age Pottery (I): Miscellaneous Features (1–13) and F.210 ([649]; 14–32). 1) F.5 ([19]), Form F, Class I, Fabric F1, burnt; 17) Form H, Class I, Fabric F1; 2) F.11 ([32]) Form C, Class I, Fabric F1, burnt; 18) Form N, Class IV, Fabric Q2; 3) F.63 ([191]), Form F, Class I, Fabric F1; 19) Form Q, Class V, Fabric S1; 4) F.211 ([650]), Form F, Class I, Fabric F1; 20) Form G, Class I, Fabric FQIG1; 5) F.161 ([488]), Form C, Class I, Fabric F1, burnt, tooled rim- 21) Fabric F3, burnished, two incised horizontal lines; exterior, tool stabbed neck, and pre-firing neck perforations; 6) 22) Fabric F1, finger-tipped rim-top; F.13 ([35]), Form K, Class III (surface lost ?), Fabric F3; 23) Fabric F1, tool impressed rim-top; 7) F.211 (surface) Form K, Class IV, Fabric F3; 24) Form L, Class IV, Fabric F5; 8) F.299 ([689]), Fabric F1, tool impressed shoulder; 25) Fabric F1, pre-firing neck perforations; 9) F.507 ([1215]), Fabric SQ1, finger-tipped rim-top; 26) Form G, Class I, Fabric F1; 10) F.210 ([890]), Fabric F1, weakly cabled rim-top; 27) Fabric S1, fingernail impressions on rim-top; 11) F.211 (surface), Fabric F1, weakly cabled rim-top; 28) Form A, Class II, Fabric SQ2; 12) F.517 ([1253]), Fabric F1, cabled shoulder cordon; 29) Form B, Class I, Fabric S1; 13) F.63 ([191]), Form F, Class I, Fabric F1; 30) Form B, Class I, Fabric F1; 14) Form H, Class I, Fabric F1; 31) Form B, Class I, Fabric F1; 15) Form H, Class I, Fabric F1; 32) Fabric F1, finger-tipped shoulder. 16) Form B, Class I, Fabric F2; An Inland Bronze Age: Excavations at Striplands Farm, West Longstanton 23

1

2 3

4 5

6 7 8

10 11 9 12 13

14 15

16 17 18 19

21 22 23

20

24 25 26 27

28 29 30 31 32 0 10 20 centimetres 24 Christopher Evans and Ricky Patten An Inland Bronze Age: Excavations at Striplands Farm, West Longstanton 25 also been placed in the upper fill of pit F.63 ([191]), along- identified in this deposit, the assemblage is estimated to in- side a loomweight and saddle quern fragment (Fig. 14.13). clude a minimum of 175 vessels (EVE: 11.0). By comparison, The coarseware jar had a round shoulder and short upright the excavation of midden-heap deposit [649] in F.210 yielded rim (Form F), and was accompanied by fragments of a sec- 1047 sherds (11691g), with a slightly higher MSW of 11.2g ond near-identical vessel (Fig. 14.3), mixed amongst smaller (Figs. 14.12–32). This contained fragments of 87 different ves- sherds from a least of five other pots. Compared to these sels (EVE: 4.7). A programme of refitting suggested vessel ‘structured’ deposits, the large pottery groups from pit-wells fragments could be widely dispersed across the deposits (107 F.11 and F.13 were more variable in character, and contained refits in [649]; 249 in [1208]). In most instances joining and ceramic compositions that are arguably more typical of non-adjoining sherds from the same vessel were either iden- the Late Bronze Age (Brudenell & Cooper 2008). The pot- tified within individual excavated 1m squares, or between tery from F.13 was all recovered from the capping fills, and adjacent squares. On occasion, however, larger distances included fragments of at least seven different vessels; one were recorded, suggesting that ceramic material was mixed the partial profile of a round-bodied bowl with everted rim within the deposit, and that vessels were not simply broken, (Form K; Fig. 14.6). This material was stratified at least 0.50m gathered up, and then dumped in a particular location in the above the context yielding a radiocarbon determination of hollow. In other words, vessel fragments probably had com- 1120–910 cal. BC (2850±40 BP; Beta-280343). The pottery from plex post-breakage histories, with varying periods of delay F.13 was also recovered from the upper profile of the well, between breakage and final discard. and was in broadly the same condition at that of F.11. The assemblage included fragments of at least 13 different ves- sels, and had a rim sherd belonging to a burnt coarseware jar deposited in pit F.5 (Fig. 14.1).

Deposit No. of % of Weight range size features features Small 0-100g 79 85 101-250g 7 8 Medium 251-500g 1 1 501-1000g 2 2 Large 1000g+ 4 4 Total - 93 100 Table 5. Pottery deposit size and frequency.

Without question, the two most important assemblages derived from pit-wells F.210 (1050 sherds; 11888g) and F.504 (2042 sherds; 20999g). Before considering the substantial ce- Figure 16. Sherd-size percentages from midden and non-mid- ramic dumps in the top of these features, it is worth stress- den contexts. ing just how little pottery was recovered from the rest of their fills: three sherds (197g) from F.210 ([1061] & [1063]); 13 On the whole, the character, condition, and composition sherds (113g) from F.504 ([1255], [1256] & [1265]). The larg- of the two midden assemblages were remarkably similar, est of the midden-heap assemblages derived from [1208] in particular in regards vessel-class representation (Fig. 12), F.504, and had 2389 sherds (20886g) with a MSW of 8.7g (Fig. decoration and frequency of burnishing. Sherd-size analy- 16). Based on the total number of different rims and bases sis also demonstrated that the degree of fragmentation was

Left, Figure 15. Late Bronze Age Pottery (II): F.504 ([1208] 1) Fabric SQ1, finger-tipped shoulder; 19) Fabric F1, tool impressed rim-top, finger-tipped neck with 2) Fabric SQ1, finger-tipped shoulder; crudely incised lines and pre-firing neck perforations; 3) Fabric SQ1, finger-tipped shoulder; 20) Form X, Class V, Fabric F6, two incised horizontal line on 4) Fabric S1, tool impressed rim-top; rim-interior, and incised geometric decoration on exterior body; 5) Form G, Class I, Fabric F1; 21) Fabric F1, (form uncertain), pre-firing neck perforations; 6) Form H, Class I, Fabric F1, weakly cabled rim-top; 22) Form B, Class I, Fabric F1; 7) Fabric SQ2, finger-tipped neck; 23) Form S, Class V, Fabric F1; 8) Form J, Class IV, Fabric F5; 24) Form H. Class I, Fabric F6; 9) Form G, Class I, Fabric F1, finger-tipped shoulder; 25) Form T, Class V, Fabric F5; 10) Form E, Class I, Fabric F4; 26) Fabric F6, burnished, furrowed neck; 11) Form J, Class III, Fabric Q2; 27) Form H, Class I, Fabric F1; 12) Fabric F1, finger-tipped rim-top; 28) Form G, Class I, Fabric F3; 13) Form G, Class I, Fabric F1; 29) Form G, Class I, Fabric 1; 14) Form S, Class V, Fabric F4; 30) Form F, Class I, Fabric F1; 15) Form E, Class I, Fabric F1; 31) Form L, Class IV, Fabric F3; 16) Form N, Class IV, Fabric F5; 32) Form L, Class III, Fabric GF1; 17) Form J, Class III, Fabric F1; 33) Form F, Class I, Fabric GF1. 18) Form G, Class II, Fabric F4; 26 Christopher Evans and Ricky Patten comparable (Fig. 16), even through [649] did have a slightly totals gleaned from three of Cambridgeshire’s other higher frequency of medium sized-sherds (which probably major Late Bronze Age assemblages (Addenbrooke’s accounts for the greater MSW). More importantly, the overall Hutchison Site, 58 vessels; the Fordham Bypass Site, composition of these two groups mirrors that from the non- 20 vessels; Stonea, 117 vessels [Brudenell 2008, 37 and midden contexts, suggesting that the character of the mid- in prep.]). Thus, whilst it is tempting to postulate that den assemblage is only exceptional because of its size, not its Striplands attracted a scale of occupation beyond the content. Put another way, we might claim that the character presence of one or two households, the non-midden of pit and posthole pottery groups are broadly representative totals are wholly typical of figures from the region’s of the composition of surface deposits not normally encoun- other plough-truncated open settlements. tered on plough-truncated settlement sites. Thus, no matter what the gross ‘loss’ of ceramic material from surface depos- Before, however, discounting the broader rele- its is, we can be reasonably confident that pottery surviving vance of these deposits and their unusually high ves- in cut features is a representative sample; albeit a minor one. sel count totals, we need to appreciate that the two The date of the midden-heap pottery is confirmed by midden assemblages were not simply composed of two radiocarbon determinations: one from a charred seed the material otherwise ‘missing’ from other contexts from [649] (910–790 cal. BC/2680±40 BP; Beta-280345:); the on the site. Indeed, despite an intensive programme other from food residue adhering to a coarseware sherd of rim refitting, only one cross-feature link was iden- from [1208] (1190–1140 and 1140–920 cal. BC/2870±40 BP; tified with a midden context. Moreover, it was not Beta-286572). This accords well with our current understand- even possible to establish any direct material connec- ing of the typological development of PDR Plainwares in tion between the two midden deposits themselves, Cambridgeshire. Given the range of vessel forms identified suggesting the accumulations were either generated at Striplands Farm, coupled with the presence of one or two from different contemporary households, or were angular bowls, and the limited occurrence of incised fineware otherwise formed at slightly different times (certainly decoration, a date in the 9th century BC would seem most there is no indication that they both derived from a appropriate for this group; the earlier, Beta-286572 assay ‘greater’ common source). Whilst several scenarios being, for whatever reason, a shade too early. can be undoubtedly be modelled with the available data, our difficulties in identifying material connec- When the Late Bronze Age pottery from Stonea was tions with deposits outside of these dumps, perhaps published in the mid 1990s (Needham 1996), few suggests that the practices responsible for the mid- other significant PDR Plainware groups had been re- den accumulation operated in ways that were subtly covered from Cambridgeshire. With a spate of large- different to those generating other ceramic deposits scale excavations conducted in the intervening years, around the settlement. the county now boasts an impressive catalogue of well-recorded and fully quantified Late Bronze Age The Wood Assemblage assemblages, each contributing to a much more re- Maisie Taylor fined understanding of the regional character of this ceramic tradition. Whilst some questions of chronol- The pit-wells produced an important and diverse pre- ogy remain to be resolved at a broader scale, the sub- served wood assemblage, which included 17 distinct stantial and well-dated group from Striplands now ‘artefacts’ as such. provides a much-needed benchmark with which to F.13: Aside from the possible bark box describe below (and compare other contemporary assemblages. The two additional bark fragments), this had 16 pieces of wood, key groups are those deriving from the midden de- 14 of which are roundwood, varying in diameter from to posits of F.210 and F.504, whose radiocarbon dates 23–50mm, plus one larger piece (140mm diam.; WD34). All place the pottery towards the end of the Late Bronze of them have one or more characteristics of coppice: long Age. straight stems, the curve at the bottom of the stem towards the heel or at the heel itself. All are trimmed and there are Issues of chronology aside, it is also appropriate to 5 address what the quantities of pottery at Striplands toolmarks on one piece (30:6; see below). There were two might indicate. Whilst the overall size of the assem- stakes in the same feature that were set vertically, securing a horizontal. Both are trimmed roundwood of a similar type blage is undoubtedly a direct result of localised ‘mid- to the rest, but at the thicker end of the range; one has a tool- den-heap’ survivals in pit-wells F.210 and F.504, we mark (35:6). are still faced with an interpretative challenge when WD40 (Figs. 6 & 17): Bark, one piece with a curved edge it comes to deciding what the presence of 327 differ- and a second piece with a straight edge. The two edges ent vessels means in regards to the scale and duration have very small holes and slight corrugations. It is pos- of occupation. To put this figure into some perspec- sible that this is evidence for sewing and that the pieces tive, ‘pristine’ and potentially singe-phase settle- were originally part of a bark box. Unfortunately, the ment sites such as Toll House, Broom, Beds. (Cooper bark is so frail that it is impossible to be sure. The curved & Edmonds 2007, 106–14), and the Lofts Farm, Essex piece is 220 x 150mm. (Brown 1988) yielded fragments of just 52 and 63 different vessels respectively. Though these figures F.71–3: Feature 71 had a wide range of material, with 22 re- seem remarkably low when set against the Striplands corded pieces, plus various twigs and possible roots. There totals, it is, perhaps, more telling that the site's non- are two partial socketed axe hafts, and two pieces of debris. midden vessel count was 69; a figure directly com- One of the latter is probably the tip of a radially split stake, parable to the aforementioned settlements, as well at whilst the other is detritus from working an ash pole (22mm An Inland Bronze Age: Excavations at Striplands Farm, West Longstanton 27

Figure 17. Worked Wood and Bark Artefacts/Implements. diam.). The remaining pieces, which vary in diameter from from a half-split log that was originally 85–90mm diam- 20–45mm, are roundwood; almost all are trimmed and near- eter. The foreshaft is a natural side branch. The surface ly all appear to come from coppices, except one piece that of the foreshaft is slightly fluted from the shaping and is looks more like it may have derived from a hedge. There are rebated to receive the axe. The surviving length of the two toolmarks, both on trimmed roundwood: 30:4 and 34:3. haft is 127mm and that of the foreshaft, 200mm. The F.72 recut yielded some small roundwood and de- WD13; F.71 (Fig. 17): Possibly part of an unfinished sock- bris, with two worked pieces: a miniature log ladder and a eted axe haft, formed from the junction of two branches. natural oak fork that has been trimmed on the prongs leav- The diameter of the haft is 20mm and the foreshaft is ing a toolmark (38:4). Finally, F.73 produced a fragmentary 24mm. It is neatly shaped and rounded on the ‘elbow’, but withy and one piece of roundwood, which is trimmed at the roundwood of the haft and foreshaft is unmodified. one end from all directions; a toolmark on this end measures It is unfinished, with the end of the foreshaft trimmed 27:2. squarish from four directions. Very small, slightly flimsy, WD11; F.71 (Fig. 17): Part of a one-piece axe haft, shaped and shaped from unmodified roundwood, there is some 28 Christopher Evans and Ricky Patten

doubt about whether or not it really is an axe haft. The wood with one step (possibly broken on second step.) overall surviving length is 120mm, and the length of the The bottom end of the log is trimmed from three direc- foreshaft is 115mm. tions with toolmarks measuring 32:4. The log shows the WD31; F.72 (Figs. 18 & 19): Small roundwood log ladder slight curve of a coppice stem and the trimming is done with one step that has surviving toolmarks: 34:3; one end in such a way as to compensate for the curve. The length is trimmed from two directions. The surviving length is is 1140mm and, the diameter, 170mm. 800mm and the log is 100mm diameter. WD2; F.73: Fragmentary piece of a twisted single stem. F 504/526: Feature 504 itself had only one artefact, the rough- Heavily twisting a plant stem, especially of willow, will out for a small trough. There is slightly more debris here than result in a flexible ‘withy’ – a primitive form of readily in most of the other features, with a radially split piece of available rope. timber debris derived from a stem 140mm diameter, another piece, this time of ash derived from an even smaller tree, F.210: This largely produced roundwood, including the three plus a couple of ‘hacked lumps’. This leaves the roundwood log ladders and a forked ‘lift’. Of the remainder, one piece is (five pieces, plus some badly crushed fragments), which is all split roundwood that has been modified square with a mor- derived from coppice (25–c. 60mm diam.); most are trimmed tice at one end. The original diameter was 150+mm. with a and one piece is another natural fork with trimmed prongs. mortice. The remainder is roundwood and almost all is cop- In addition to a log ladder and a small woodchip, F.525 piced (one piece is pollarded) and trimmed. There is a fork had some fragments of reasonably thick bark (15mm) and (with a toolmark, 36:3), and a large quantity of coppiced and three pieces of roundwood (55–70mm diam.). One of the lat- trimmed roundwood (25–100mm diam.) with a variety of ter, is coppiced oak and, of the others, one is coppiced and toolmarks: 36:3, 35:7, 28:3 and 45:4. trimmed and the other is probably coppiced. WD53 (Fig. 19): Log ladder, roundwood, with one step. The main F.526 recut included four log ladders, some Toolmarks on the step measure 32:6; the top, which is chunky fragments of bark, roundwood and a tangential forked, is very worn and the bottom end is trimmed woodchip; whereas F.530 produced some very thin bark and from one direction. It is 630mm long, and its irregular several pieces of fairly large, trimmed roundwood, two with diameter measures 150/110mm. rough mortices (WD77 & WD78; Figs. 10 & 18). Other than WD54 (Figs. 18 & 19): Log ladder, roundwood, with a smaller piece in bad condition, the roundwood from the three steps. The bottom end of the log is trimmed from latter ranges in size from 95–190mm. two directions in the classic ‘felled tree’ shape. The mid- WD65; F.504 (Fig. 17): This rough-out of small trough is dle step has toolmarks measuring 35:4, but the tree it- shaped from the central part of a small roundwood log self was felled with an axe measuring 32:4. The ladder is that originally had a diameter of a little over 44mm. It 1560mm long and 160mm diameter. is covered with toolmarks, many of them partial: 23:2.5, WD56 (Fig. 19): Forked ‘lift’ and/or possible log lad- 15:2, 27:3, 31:6 and it is also partially charred on the in- der, made from forked roundwood. The fork had been side. Because so many of the toolmarks are partial, it is shaped by removing wood from one side to make the not possible to be sure that they were all made by differ- base of the fork square, almost like an open-faced mor- ent axes. Dimensions: 300 x 90 x 50mm. tice. While this may have functioned as a raised ‘step’ WD66; F.525 (Figs. 18 & 19): A miniature log ladder, (i.e. ladder), it could equally have housed a horizontal made from roundwood with two steps and a flat base. element and possibly even acted as a pivot. The bottom The back of the log has also been slightly flattened, pre- end of the timber is trimmed from three directions; in its sumably to aid stability. It appears to have broken on a entirety, the piece is 1355mm long and 85mm diameter. third step. Well finished, there are few toolmarks, only WD63 (Fig. 19): Log ladder, made from roundwood one on a step: 35:3. Dimensions: L.1030mm; D.45mm. with side branches trimmed off. One step survives and WD67; F.526 (Figs. 18 & 19): A roundwood log ladder the bottom end had been trimmed from three directions with a fork at the top and three steps, with many tool- with an axe measuring 40:4. The surviving length is marks. The bottom end is trimmed from two directions 760mm and the diameter 135mm. against a strong natural curve. The fork at the top may have stabilised the ladder when in use. Dimensions: F.370: In addition to an unfinished socketed axe haft and a L.1620mm; D.115/120mm. log ladder, this yielded debris from working roundwood and WD68; F.526: A fragment of a log ladder, made from three pieces of trimmed roundwood. The debris includes a roundwood, broken on the first step. Although it is fragment of a half-split pole (50mm diam.) with a toolmark badly crushed and broken, it is clear that the original (37:4), plus a radially split and trimmed ‘off-cut’ of very slow log was derived from coppice as it is markedly curved. grown ash. Although slow-grown, the tree was not ancient Dimensions: L.270mm; D.65/76mm. and probably had a diameter of only around 200mm when it WD74; F.526 (Figs. 18 & 19): A log ladder, made from was felled. The remaining material consists of three pieces of a small felled tree, with one step. There are toolmarks trimmed roundwood, one of which is ash and another had on the felled end: 48:8. The end of the trunk is cut from a toolmark (40:4). two directions in the classic shape of a felled tree, but WD43 (Fig. 17): Part of unfinished socketed axe haft there are a large number of knots near the base that sug- made of oak. The haft is formed from a half-split log gests the trunk may have been derived from a multi- which was originally 80–90mm diameter; the foreshaft stemmed tree, most likely an overgrown coppice. The is an unmodified side-branch, approximately 40mm di- single step is 670mm from the base, which is higher than ameter. As a whole the piece is well finished, with no any of the site’s other ladder. Dimensions: L.1110mm; D toolmarks. The haft length is 420mm and the foreshaft, 120/160mm. 120mm. WD75; F.526 (Figs. 18 & 19): An apparently complete, WD50 (Figs. 18 & 19): Log ladder, made from round- possible miniature roundwood log ladder with two An Inland Bronze Age: Excavations at Striplands Farm, West Longstanton 29

Figure 18. Worked Wood: Detailed log ladder and mortised timber drawings. 30 Christopher Evans and Ricky Patten

Figure 19. Worked Wood: top, log ladder profiles angled with their steps set to horizontal; below, the F.210 forked ‘lift’ (WD56).

‘mini-steps’, and both ends trimmed from one direction. Only one piece was recorded specifically as not being cop- There is a slight curve to the trunk, suggesting that it may piced, WD17 (F.71), a piece of roundwood with side branch- have been derived from a multi-stemmed tree or over- es. The range of the assemblage’s diameters also suggests grown coppice. Dimensions: L.1210mm; D.69/71mm. systematic coppicing. Modern ‘traditional’ hurdles are made using coppice rods with diameters between 15 and 50mm (Forestry Commission 1956), which is the same range as Woodland Management/Coppicing most of the material here, although there are some larger Wood derived from coppicing trees and shrubs often exhibits pieces. Most of the artefacts, including the trough, axe hafts distinctive characteristics. These include long, straight stems, and the majority of the log ladders, are derived from mate- a slight curve where the stem joins the stool and the actual rial greater than 76mm diameter. Even the ‘timber’ from the heel where the stem was detached. Almost all the material site (of which there is very little) was taken from trees with from this site possesses one or more of these characteristics. An Inland Bronze Age: Excavations at Striplands Farm, West Longstanton 31 a maximum diameter of only 240mm. The only evidence for modern tools have a universal haft or handle with different larger trees is from F.526: five pieces of corky bark, 15mm heads that snap on and off; the Bronze Age equivalent was a thick, which must have been derived from mature speci- universal head (the socketed axe) with a variety of hafts for mens. different functions. The coppiced species include oak and ash, as well as the The bark from F.13 (WD40; Fig. 17) consists of one piece ‘usual’ species of hazel, alder and willow. As well as the dis- with a curved edge and a second with a straight edge. The carded stems (most of which are the right size for wattle), two edges have very small holes and slight corrugations. It coppice wood was also used for the artefacts – axe hafts and is possible that this is evidence for sewing and that the pieces log ladders. Some of the coppice material is relatively short were originally part of a bark box. Unfortunately, the bark is and curved, and obviously represents trimmings, but there so frail that it is impossible to be sure. Boxes made of bark or are also some quite long pieces that may have been selected thin bent wood have been found from the Neolithic onwards as raw material and then discarded. The coppice may be and earlier on the Continent. These earliest boxes seem to trimmed in various ways depending on size of the stem. have been sewn, usually with bast fibres or sometimes very thin split wood. There is an unpublished example from Yarnton, Oxfordshire, a Bronze Age one from Runnymede Woodworking and Toolmarks and Neolithic ones from Lower Horton, especially Vessel 2 All the woodworking is very simple technology, but is in (Earwood 1993, 42). The Lower Horton vessels were finer, keeping with the light-weight material, derived from pol- with thinner bark, and were made of birch (Betula sp.) with larding, coppicing, roughing out artefacts and ad hoc man- lime bast (Tilia sp.) stitching. ufacture of log ladders. There is some simple split wood, The rough-out of small trough from F.504 (WD65; Fig. mostly half- and quarter-split roundwood with diameters in 17), was shaped out of the central part of a small roundwood the region of 150–200mm, but splitting of the kind associated log, which originally had a diameter of a little over 44mm. with large timber is absent here. There is some light hewing It was made by chopping across the grain at the ends and, on a piece of ash wood from F.504 and, again, on a small log then, prising or gouging out the wood between. It is also par- ladder from F.525 (WD66); however, here are no woodchips tially charred on the inside, which may have been part of a in the assemblage which might have been derived from this manufacturing process, such as has already been recognised kind of activity. elsewhere (Taylor 1998, 154–55). The trough appears to be of The only evidence for joinery is three rough mortices, two a type that has occurred at Yarnton (unpublished), although on pieces from F.530 and another from F.210 [1062]; both are this one is considerably smaller. half-split ash trunks less than 200mm diameter. The log ladders are all basically made in similar ways, There is a high concentration, and an unusual range, of with extremely simple woodworking skills. Their round- artefacts from the site, but all are manufactured from coppice wood trunks had notches cut as steps, the angle of the steps products. The one-piece axe hafts here are all unfinished or varying depending on the angle at which the ladder is to be broken and made from a single piece of a small tree. One used (Fig. 19). These steps are a good source of toolmarks as from F.71, which is less convincing than the others, is formed the risers are not subject to much wear. Log ladders have be- from the junction of two branches, so that both the haft and come a relatively common find, especially in wells on gravel the foreshaft are roundwood. This means that the haft would sites and were obviously the normal way to gain access in be very springy to use as well as being very small. The haft these sometimes deep pits. There is, however, no standard from Flag Fen, which is also made with roundwood for the design and they come in many shapes and forms. They are haft and the foreshaft, is much heavier duty (Taylor 2001, obviously made ad hoc from available materials; miniature 220–22 and fig. 7.57); its handle diameter is 30–36mm as op- log ladders are not entirely unknown (Nicholson et al. forth- posed to 20mm here. coming). The other two axe hafts are more convincing, larger and Withies are most frequently found as stitches of sewn made in a more functional way. The second haft from F.71, boats, and seem to have been made from a variety of species, WD11, is complete, but unfinished, and the one from F.370, probably depending on what was available locally (see, e.g. WD43 is finished and was probably broken in use. They Wright 1990, 64, fig. 4.7). Although rarely found in domestic are both made from a half-split log with a side branch. The contexts, withies were almost certainly ubiquitous. haft from F.370 is made from a log of oak with a diameter Of the toolmarks recorded, almost all were on round- of 80mm, whilst the fragment from F.71 is from a slightly wood of one form or another. 14 were recorded on simple larger log (85–90mm diam.). The surviving length of the haft chopped ends: 27:2, 28:3 (x 2), 30:4, 30:6, 32:2, 34:3, 35:6, 35:7, is 127mm and it appears to have broken in use by splitting 37:4, 38:4, 40:4, 45:4 and 48:2. There was also one (55:3) from along the grain just below the head. The fragment of an axe a felled tree, another from a pollarded tree (35:7) and a third haft from Flag Fen (Taylor 2010, 88, fig. 4.27), which is vir- from the trimmed prongs of a natural fork (36:3). A total tually identical to the one from F.370, has broken along the of nine toolmarks were recorded from the log ladders. All grain in the same way as that from F.71. There are not many were on the steps, except two (40:4 & 32:4) which wereon complete hafts with which to compare, but the palstave haft the ends; in both cases, the ends were also the felled ends from Langtoft is constructed in an identical manner (Webley from the original felling of the tree to make the ladders. The 2004, fig. 3). The haft from F.370 was probably abandoned six toolmarks measured on the ladders steps are: 32:4, 32:6, because a split began to develop in the foreshaft, which is 34:3, 35:3, 35:6 and 48:8. The remaining four toolmarks (15:2, unmodified roundwood. 23:2.5, 27:3 & 31:6) are all on the rough-out for a small trough The similarity of a socketed axe haft to a palstave haft (F.504, [1265]). The range of documented axe widths – 15– may indicate that it is an early form, but a series of experi- 55mm – is well within the range for socketed axes recorded ments with replica axe hafts in 2004/5 suggested that dif- at Flag Fen (Taylor 2001, table 7.28). ferent hafts may have fulfilled different functions. Different Thirty toolmarks were measured (Table 6), but some are hafts would have made the axes much more versatile. Some the same or closely similar (within 1mm). When this is taken 32 Christopher Evans and Ricky Patten

Axe No. Toolmark Axe No. Toolmark Axe No. Toolmark Axe No. Toolmark 1 15:2 2 23:2.5 3 27:2; 27:3 4 28:3 5 30:4 6 30:6; 31:6 7 32:2 8 32:4 9 32:6 10 34:3 11 35:3; 35:4 12 35:6; 35:7 13 36:3 14 37:4 15 38:4 16 40:4 17 45:4 18 48:2 19 48:8 20 55:3

Table 6. Axe toolmark measurements in mm (width:depth). into account, the more likely number of axes actually in use Other Finds is 20 or less (there are also several closely similar measure- Grahame Appleby ments for Axes 8–13). Examined by feature, there does not appear to be any pat- Studied by Andrew McLaren, in total 1657 flints were tern in the distribution of toolmarks and, almost without ex- ception, several axes are represented in the assemblage from recovered. Of these, 547 were unburnt (and worked; any one pit-well. Considering the toolmarks by function is, 17 both worked and burnt), with the remainder being however, somewhat more informative: burnt alone. While including both a later Mesolithic/ earlier Neolithic and later Neolithic/Early Bronze Roundwood Age component (e.g. a leaf-shaped arrowhead from Trimmed ends: Axes 3, 4 (x 2), 5, 6, 7, 10, 12 (x 2), 13, 14, F.71 and a core rejuvenation flake from F.353), the vast 15, 16, 17 & 18 majority of the pieces are of Bronze Age attribution. Felled ends: Axe 8, 16 & 20 Due to a paucity of diagnostic types, the problem the Pollarded Tree: Axe 12 assemblage poses is how late within that period was Log Ladders: Axes 8, 9, 10, 11 (x 2), 12 & 19 its date. While, for example, that the majority of the Trough: Axes 1, 2, 3 & 6. cores were multi-platform (with many having been worked in a ‘haphazard’ fashion) could, in theory, The axes are ordered by blade-width, which means the suggest a Late Bronze Age attribution (see e.g. Ford et higher the number of the axe, the wider the blade. Axe 1, al. 1984; Herne 1992), this is undermined by the mate- therefore is 15mm wide and Axe 20 is 55mm wide. Not sur- rial’s distribution. The bulk of the worked flint (84%; prisingly, given its small size, the trough has been roughed 458 pieces) derived from the F.504/526 well complex, out using relatively small axes. It is surprising, however, that and from the same area that the earlier, Beaker and four different tools appear to have been used. It is possible Deverel Rimbury pottery occurred; rather than being that the smaller marks are incomplete and represent part of any kind of pristine ‘Late’ assemblage, this suggests a blade that is larger. Trimming roundwood, which generally much of it was probably earlier-Middle Bronze Age. means coppicing, has seen almost the full range of axe sizes, The excavations also resulted in the recovery of whereas there is a tendency to use larger tools to cut the steps of the log ladders. There is no strong pattern, however, and 479 fragments of fired clay (6828g) from 16 pits and some axes appear in more than one activity; for example, wells, with a further six fragments (30g) from other Axe 12 appears in the roundwood trimming, pollarding a features. A near-complete rectangular loomweight tree and for cutting steps on a log ladder. was retrieved from pit F.63, in addition to a second perforated fragment (also probably a loomweight); a Log ladders were not only associated with waterholes, third possible loomweight fragment was forthcom- as they would have made good general-purpose lad- ing from pit-well F.13. F.504/526 yielded 398 pieces ders for many situations. Maintenance of roundhouse (3860g), with seven pieces identified as deriving roofs at Flag Fen, for example, has been done using from loomweights. The precise shape of the latter is log ladders for many years, and they are widely used unclear, but similarity in fabric and width suggests in other cultures (Pryor 2001, pl. 16). They were obvi- they were comparable with that recovered from F.63. ously ubiquitous and made on an ad hoc basis, thus All but one of the loomweight fragments was recov- explaining the great variety of ‘designs’. ered from F.504/526’s midden spread, mainly from The number and variety of artefacts is most unu- towards the centre of the feature; the remaining 80 sual, but this suggests that they were being made on fragments had flat surfaces, possibly indicating use the site because the right raw material was available. as daub. Forty pieces of fired clay were also recov- It is also possible that the ones found here were re- ered from the midden spread sealing F.210, includ- jects, which would also explain why some of them are ing a spindle-whorl, a crucible fragment (with copper unusual: some of the log ladders are very small, very alloy droplets adhering) and a possible metalworking shallow steps, steps very high, etc. (Fig. 19). Equally, mould piece. A second spindle-whorl was also recov- the axe hafts are either broken or unfinished, and ered from pit F.66, although this may be of later date. the trough is unfinished. None of these artefacts are Also noteworthy is that a saddle-quern and a pos- particularly sophisticated and their manufacture de- sible rubbing stone formed part of pit-well F.504/526’s pends more on the quality of the raw material than assemblage. Equally, five freshwater mussel shells complex woodworking skills. (Unio spp.) were recovered together from F.71 dur- ing the evaluation-phase (Fig. 20). These had all been An Inland Bronze Age: Excavations at Striplands Farm, West Longstanton 33 pierced with a single perforation at their posterior F.71–73/F.156: Of the 140 bone specimens recorded, 89 ends towards the ventral margin and are almost (c. 64%) could be assigned to species level. Cattle were certainly from a necklace. The holes are 2.5–3mm the prevalent species, followed by pig and horse (Table 7). in diameter and have either been drilled or pecked, Ovicaprids were under-represented with three bone speci- as indicated by the spalling of the shell around the mens only. Wild species were represented with two native deer species: red deer and roe deer as well as wild boar. A holes. Inhabiting running, freshwater habitats, such human skull fragment was also found in [217]. shellfish could have been exploited for their nutri- tional value, but the recovery of this discrete clutch Taxon NISP NISP% MNI (no other mussel shells were found) some distance Cow 52 58 3 away from a known suitable source suggests that Pig 14 16 2 they were brought into the area from elsewhere. Horse 13 15 1 Ovicaprid 3 3 1 Red deer 4 5 1 Environmental and Economic Data Roe deer 1 1 1 Wild boar 2 2 1 Given the crucial importance of the settlement’s Cattle-sized 46 - - ‘inland’ location as concerns issues of subsistence Sheep-sized 5 - - adaptation and setting, both its environmental and Total 140 100 - economic studies warrant detailed presentation. Table 7. F.71: Number of Identified Specimens (NISP; % based on Faunal Remains only total number of identified species: 89) and Minimum Number Vida Rajkovacˇa of Individuals (MNI).

Following assessment of the site’s full faunal assem- Three instances of butchery were noted, two being sugges- blages (see Swaysland in Patten & Evans 2005 and tive of skinning. Four fine knife marks were recorded on a Mackay & Knight 2007) the decision was made to red deer calcaneum and two fine cut marks were observed on the dorsal surface of a cow astragalus; the third example target only those feature having more than 100 ani- was a chop mark on a cow scapula. Only three bone speci- mal bones for further study: F.71–73/F.156, F.210 and mens (c. 2%) showed signs of gnawing, suggesting quick de- F.504. Together, these yielded a total of 1106 assess- position of the material. able specimens, of which 578 (c. 52%) were identified 6 Comparable to Legge’s type 7A (1992, 63, fig. 25), a to species level. worked bone point fashioned from an ovicaprid metatarsal

Figure 20. Perforated Mussel Shells (F.71). 34 Christopher Evans and Ricky Patten was recovered from [218]. This is c. 82mm long, although the ratio of the midden deposit ([649]), ovicaprids predominated, tip of the point is broken. followed by cattle, pig and horse; two bones were butchered Cattle accounted for more than all the other species col- and three demonstrated gnawing. lectively and are the predominant species when the MNI is taken into account. The unidentified mammal count, where F.504/526: The feature’s faunal material has been divided fragments were assigned to a size-category, was also used to into two sub-sets, with that from the upper fill [1208] quanti- show which class of domesticates prevailed in this assem- fied independently of the lower waterlogged deposits. The blage. The frequency of cattle-sized fragments supports the sub-sets differed in terms of quantity, state of preservation notion that cattle were of primary importance on this site. and taphonomic condition; a total of 521 assessable speci- As is further discussed below, the under-representation of mens were recorded, 326 (c. 63%) of which originated from ovicaprids is somewhat surprising. the midden ([1208]). Cattle were the dominant species from these upper deposits, accounting for more than all other spe- F.210: The majority of the faunal material originated from cies combined (Table 9). Only two ageable specimens were the upper midden fill ([649]) and this has been considered recorded: a sheep mandible aged 2–6 months and a pig man- independently from the lower material. Out of 445 bone dible at 27–36 months. specimens recovered from this feature, 407 (91%) fragments came from the midden deposit. Of the latter, 199 (c. 45%) Midden Lower Deposits were possible to identify to species. The relative importance Taxon NISP NISP% MNI NISP NISP% MNI of three main ‘food-species’ showed a clear predominance of Cow 81 52 3 45 40 3 cattle and similar proportions of pig and ovicaprids (Table 8). Ovicaprid 39 25 2 33 30 1 Both sheep and goat were positively identified. Other species include dog and horse, as well as the same three wild species Sheep 3 2 1 5 4 1 already recorded in F.71. Goat 1 1 1 1 1 1 Butchery was observed on 11 specimens and includes Pig 16 10 2 12 11 1 skinning and disarticulation. A sheep-sized hyoid bone had Horse 4 3 1 6 5 1 several knife marks probably implying slaughter and a red Red deer 9 6 1 4 4 1 deer metatarsal appeared to have been prepared for bone Roe deer 1 1 1 - - - working. Wild boar - - - 6* 5 1 In addition to the butchery, another two definite exam- Cattle-sized 73 - - 55 - - ples of bone working were recovered. The distal end of a cow Sheep-sized 64 - - 29 - - ulna has been fashioned into a gouge (106mm long), with Mammal n.f.i. 34 - - - - - the knife marks in the shape of longitudinal striations still Total 325 100 - 196 100 - visible on the working end of the tool. The feature also yield- Total NISP 521 ed a worked bone point fashioned from a sheep/goat tibia (85.0mm long) with the distal end cut at an oblique angle to Table 9. F.504/526: NISP- and MNI-values (n.f.i. indicates no form a point; comparable to Legge’s type 5 (1992, 61, fig. 23). further identification; NISP % based on only total number of iden- Gnawing was noted on 28 specimens (c. 7%) suggesting tified species: 154). that the bone material was left within the reach of scaven- gers; dog bone was also identified. Butchery actions had been performed on seven bones, sug- gesting skinning and meat removal or filleting. In addition, Midden Lower Deposits three instances of bone working were noted. A sheep/goat tibia has been split axially and fashioned into an awl-type Taxon NISP NISP% MNI NISP NISP% MNI tool. A sheep-sized limb bone fragment has also been found Cow 90 45 7 6 25 1 with two incised longitudinal grooves where the bone would Ovicaprid 43 21.5 4 9 38 1 have been split and later modified; this probably represents Sheep 2 1 1 1 4 1 the working waste or an unfinished tool. The final piece of Goat 1 0.5 1 - - - worked bone is a cattle-sized limb bone fragment with a perforation in the middle. Its distal end seems rounded and Pig 51 26 4 2 8 1 polished; however, it is difficult to determine the type and Dog 3 1.5 1 - - - the function of this object. Horse 1 0.5 1 1 4 1 A total of 196 (c. 38%) bone specimens came from the fea- Red deer 3 1.5 1 3 13 1 ture’s lower deposits. The material has a slightly better state of preservation and shows almost no signs of gnawing, in- Roe deer 3 1.5 1 1 4 1 dicative of the quick deposition. In keeping with the results Wild boar 2 1 1 1 4 1 from the other two pit-wells, cattle feature as the dominant Cattle-sized 113 - - 7 - - species. Ovicaprids are slightly better represented than in Sheep-sized 95 - - 7 - - the overlying midden contexts; however, the range of species Total 407 100 - 38 100 - present seems to reflect the same type of economy and hunt- ing strategies. The sub-set is again dominated by the three Total NISP 445 main ‘food-species’, with wild species also present. Two Table 8. F.210: NISP- and MNI-values (NISP % based on only ageable specimens were recorded, a cow mandible aged to total number of identified species: 199). 8–12 months and a cow scapula, 0–6 months; an unfused cow scapula attests to local cattle breeding. A small quantity of animal bone was also recovered from the One deposit, [1265], in addition to waterlogged wood, feature’s lower fills: 38 specimens. In contrast to the species- flint and pottery, included an articulated portion of two An Inland Bronze Age: Excavations at Striplands Farm, West Longstanton 35 front wild boar legs (scapulae, ulnae, radii, metacarpals, car- wild grassland. Although heavily reliant on cattle, pals and phalanges). A complete radius measured 205mm the Striplands Farm community also clearly engaged (Greatest Length; GL) and a domestic pig radius recovered in hunting: the activity most likely being both socio- from the same context measured 140mm (GL). Measurements cultural and economic in character. of the proximal and distal articulation are also within the range for wild boar given by Payne and Bull (1988, 41). The Bulk Environmental Samples absence of butchery marks almost certainly indicates that Anne de Vareilles bones were articulated/fleshed when they were deposited. In contrast to Pryor’s sheep-dominated interpre- Altogether 43 samples from 21 features were proc- tations of the Fenland’s Bronze Age field systems essed and examined from the various fieldwork stag- (1996), a recent review of the region’s faunal data es. Leaving aside the Romano-British and later phase has demonstrated what was actually a predomi- contexts, the results from the bulk soil samples from nantly cattle-based economy (58.5–86%; Evans et al. 17 Late Bronze Age features are discussed. 2009, table 6.3). Variously having 54/56% cattle (vs. Environmental and cultural data has survived 27/29% ovicaprids), Striplands’ Late Bronze Age as- through both charred and waterlogged plant re- semblage would largely accord with this. Yet, based mains. Though overall quantities of carbonised on data from sites in southern Britain – particularly plant remains were low, delicate elements such as Runnymede and Potterne – it has been argued that cereal chaff and grass roots indicate that their ab- the Late Bronze Age saw a marked intensification sence was not a direct result of adverse preservation. of agriculture and an increase in sheep husbandry Waterlogged seeds were recovered from the large (Serjeantson 1996 and 2007; Locker 2000). As is appar- pit-wells F.370, F.71, F.504/526, and F.210. The latter ent in the comparative site-data presented in Table two also contained charred cereal grains and chaff in 10, this would not seem true of the region where, in- their midden-capping fills. Snail shells were found in stead, it was only during the Early Iron Age that there most of the samples, the most common and abundant was an increase in sheep (which remains at higher species being the intrusive blind burrowing snail levels, and locally even increases to 50–75% during Ceciloides acicula. Since their assemblages are insig- the Middle/later Iron Age; see Higbee in Evans et al. nificant and no ‘indicator’ species were found, they 2007). shall not be discussed further. Carbonised remains The assemblage’s relatively high proportion of will be considered first and emphasis will be placed wild species also deserves comment. The combined upon the large pit-wells. percentage of ‘the wild’ on the other sites compared here ranges between c. 1 and 4%, and at Striplands Cremation F.2: A maximum of 14 hulled wheat and/or bar- these also account for c. 4%. Almost all of the list- ley grains were found, and a single spelt wheat glume base ed sites include red and roe deer. The wild boar in (Triticum spelta L.) suggests that the grain may have been Striplands’ faunal record is particularly significant offered as whole ears or spikelets. Seven grass stem nodes given that its confident determination is usually rare and six grass (possibly wild) basal nodes with rootlets may on Late Bronze Age sites (see Hambleton 2009, 27; support the latter suggestion. Conversely, if the pyre was Serjeantson 1996, 219–20 and Locker 2000, 105), and built on or under turf, roots and the few wild plant seeds its occurrence in this case either suggests adjacent might have charred in situ. Two hazelnut shell fragments Corylus avellana woodland suitable for pannage and/or swathes of ( L.) and 1g of possible burnt animal bone

NISP% Site Cow Ovicaprids Pig Total Ref. Runnymede (LBA only) 28 42 30 6572 Serjeantson in Needham & Spence 1996 Potterne 27 41 32 9366 Locker in Lawson 2000 Nine Bridge, Northborough 72 20 8 628 Higbee in Knight 1998 Pode Hole, Thorney (LBA only) 66 31 3 117 Rackham in Daniel 2009 Striplands Farm Midden Material 52 27 21 732 Lower Pit-well Deposits 56 29 15 374 Langtoft, S. Lincs. LBA 47 15 38 512 Higbee in Webley, forthcoming EIA 46 41 13 174 Lingwood Farm, Cottenham (EIA) 37 43 20 323 Evans 1999

Table 10. Frequency of cattle, sheep and pigs on Late Bronze and Early Iron Age sites. Having established the number of identified specimens (NISP) of each species, the percentage of the total NISP found at the site for each species was calculated. The most common domesticates (cow, ovicaprid and pig), defined by the most frequently occurring species, was then separated from the list of identified species and analysed as a separate sub-group. The percentage of the total NISP for each of these species within this sub-group was then calculated in order to demonstrate which were the most prevalent. 36 Christopher Evans and Ricky Patten could be further evidence of food offerings (McKinley 1997, spelt glume bases and three spelt or emmer glume bases. 132). The assemblage is noteworthy as food offerings are The only other carbonised plant remain recovered was a ha- not commonly encountered in Bronze Age cremations; two zelnut shell from F.517. shell fragments from F.2 – the only context in which they oc- curred – were also unexpected finds (i.e. possible necklace-/ Waterlogged Plant Remains ornament-related). Pit / Well F.504 ([1278], [1271] & [1265]): The bottom, middle and uppers fill of this feature produced dense concentra- Pits F.137 ([420] & [421]) and F.5 ([17]): F.137 was 100% sam- tions of seeds, representing around 38 species, and many pled (11 litres). Charcoal was abundant and appears to have leaf fragments from trees and/or shrubs. Although the been deliberately discarded into the pit from a fire/hearth. leaves were not identified, the pollen record suggests they Cereal remains amounted to 23 whole grains, 12 grain frag- could be oak (Quercus sp.), birch (Betula sp.), alder (Alnus ments and a hulled wheat glume base (Triticum sp.). The sp.), willow (Salix sp.), as well as from trees/shrubs noted seven wild plant seeds are of typical arable weeds and may in the seed record: hazel, blackthorn (Prunus sanguinea L.), have been added along with the grains. Associated with the dogwood (Cornus sanguinea L.), elder (Sambucus nigra L.) plant remains were 127g of burnt and unburnt animal bone, and hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna Jacq.). Insect remains, suggesting that this assemblage represents waste from food including freshwater water flea egg cases, were abundant in preparation and consumption. The same can be said for the all but the top fill. The three assemblages produced compa- finds from pit F.5, which included less charcoal and a maxi- rable results. Apart from the trees/shrubs, two other broad mum of 13 grains. ecological categories were noted: arable weeds and herbs of disturbed open land, such as fat hen and other goosefoots Structures I–III and the F.210 Midden ([649]): Posthole F.162 (Chenopodium album L.), common chickweed (Stellaria media from the four-poster Structure I and all five sampled post- [L.] Vill.), knotgrasses (Polygonum spp.), nettles (Urtica dio- holes from Structure II had no plant remains whatsoever ica L.), brambles (Rubus sp.), thistles (Carduus/Cirsium sp.), and, otherwise, just a little fine charcoal was present. Whilst sow-thistles (Sonchus sp.) and nipplewort (Lapsana commu- Structure I, interpreted as a granary, is further evidence for nis L.); plants of damp, marshy ground such as crowfoot the agricultural nature of the late prehistoric landscape, there (Ranunculus Subgen. Batrachium), marsh stitchwort (Stellaria is no reason why burnt crops should accumulate in the post- palustris Retz.), water-pepper (Persicaria hydropiper (L.) holes. Roundhouse postholes rarely contain charred plant Spach), gypsywort (Lycopus europeus L.), duckweeds (Lemna remains other than residual charcoal, though an exception spp.) and sedges (Carex spp.). can sometimes be made for their doorway setting, which ap- Though the stratigraphic detail is not as refined as in the pear to have been conveniently positioned for the accumula- pollen cores, the data concur in demonstrating open arable tion of passing debris. Four of the seventeen postholes of land with localised areas of damper ground (albeit some of Structure III were sampled. Low concentrations of charcoal the aquatic/semi-aquatic probably grew within F.504). The were present throughout, but only three had other plant re- absence of shrub pollen is not altogether unsurprising since mains. The samples (1 litre) contained no more than three they are insect-, not wind-pollinated. The question of how grains each and eight glume bases, some of which could be they fit into the landscape must remain enigmatic until fur- identified to spelt wheat. The only wild plant seed was from ther archaeological evidence concerning the planting and a goosefoot (Chenopodium sp.). Structure III was constructed management of hedges is achieved. The shrubs are typical upon F.210 and associated with the midden deposit [649]. species of open or re-generating woodland and could be ex- The higher proportion of chaff to grain is consistent with pected in an area where woodland was both used and locally waste; indeed, it is difficult to characterise these assemblages superseded by arable (see Boreham below). The presence of beyond the accumulation of midden material. Similar counts leaves, thorns and a relatively high representation of seeds/ of cereal remains were found in the six small samples from fruits could suggest that the specimens were either growing F.210 [649] (1–1.5 litres), with chaff dominating over grain. close to F.504/526 itself or that their wood was employed to Relatively high densities of charcoal, two hazelnut shell frag- erect a fence or dead-hedge around the pit-well. It is worth ments, a goosefoot and a dock seed (Rumex sp.) make up the noting, however, that the fruits of blackthorn, hawthorn, remainder of the preserved flora. Although cereal process- elder and dogwood are all consumed by birds, and which ing waste was clearly discarded into the midden deposits, may have distributed their seeds widely across the landscape. the remains are too few (probably due to sample-size) to suggest what by-products from particular processing stages Pit/Wells F.71 ([463]), F.370 ([1067]) and F.210 ([1062]): Far were considered good fuel or intentionally discarded. Finds fewer seeds were recovered from these three pits/wells, recovered from the >4mm heavy residues are consistent with representing about 30 species in total. The pollen record for those excavated and include pottery, burnt and unburnt ani- F.71 and F.210 is also poor (F.370 was not sampled), suggest- mal bone, burnt flint, burnt stone and baked clay. ing that these results are a product of poor preservation. The macrofossils do not contradict or differ markedly from Pit-well F.504/526 ([1278], [1271], [1265] & [1208]) and Pit those seen in F.504: hazel, elder, sloe and brambles would F.517 ([1259]): Although all five samples contained charcoal, have offered a range of nuts and berries, and shrubs such as only the capping layer [1208] of F.504 and the inter-cutting dogwood and hawthorn would have made useful firewood. pit F.517 ([1259]) yielded other charred plant remains (only Willow(s) grew around, and possibly even over, the features. 500ml of soil were processed from [1278], [1271], [1265] and F.517 as they were waterlogged; 12 litres were floated from F.504 [1208]). The cereal remains found were all chaff: [1208] The vegetation around these late prehistoric pit-wells had five barley rachis internodes (Hordeum vulgare sl.), a spelt therefore attests to a patchwork of ecological settings, glume base and 12 spelt or emmer glume bases (T. spelta/ whose boundaries were probably not distinct but dicoccum); whilst F.517 had a barley rachis segment, three gradually merged from one land-use to another. An Inland Bronze Age: Excavations at Striplands Farm, West Longstanton 37

Pollen the vicinity. The occurrence of alder and willow infer Steve Boreham local areas of wet woodland (carr) nearby, although the pollen of obligate aquatic plants, such as bur- Leaving aside a Saxo-Norman feature (F.362), eight reed, was not particularly common. The abundance monoliths from three Late Bronze Age cut-feature of grass and plants of tall-herb communities suggests sediment sequences were considered: two each from meadow or pasture. Although the disturbance indi- F.210 and F.71, with four from F.526 during the second cator – ribwort plantain – was present in almost every excavation-phase. sample, cereal pollen was rather infrequent (<1.1%), At the time that the lower/basal sediments of F.210 suggesting that any arable activity was small-scale ([1062]) were being deposited it appears that wood- and some distance from the site. land had been largely cleared from the site and that The evidence from F.210 and F.71 indicate that arable land-use had become established nearby (Figs. woodland clearance and arable activity seem to have 7 & 21). Remnants of oak-hazel woodland were clear- been well advanced in the area by the Late Bronze ly present and, indeed, the Liliaceae pollen present in Age, and that there appears to be evidence for a brief this sequence may represent bluebells growing on period of abandonment, possibly at the start of the the floor of that woodland. Cereals and arable weeds Early Iron Age. Clearly, soil disturbance was a ubiq- were obviously also growing within the area (cereals uitous feature of the landscape, whether associated up to 3.03%), as were sedges and bur-reed, presum- with arable activity or not at this time. ably colonising marshy ground or ditch margins. The different character of F.504 pollen assemblages Towards the top of lower monolith (26cm above base), could, in fact, suggest a somewhat earlier, Bronze Age hazel scrub appears to expand, and as time progress- environment, where partial clearance of the wooded es there is a hint that the landscape was becoming landscape had begun, but arable activity was patchy wetter as alder and willow appeared. Cereal pollen and low-key. When compared to the evidence of other was present at 1.38%. two features the key issue is whether the greater pres- The basal part of upper monolith (41cm) docu- ence of arboreal taxa relates to a somewhat earlier date ments a significant change as hazel scrub expanded or just a more immediate proximity to woodland. and cereals disappeared. Arable weeds and evidence of land disturbance are still present, but it is clear that the land-use markedly altered. One possibility is that Discussion woodland ceased to be managed, reverting to dense- ly shaded hazel scrub, arable fields were abandoned While not without interpretative attractions, it would and that pastoral grazing became the main activity. clearly be erroneous to directly equate the scale of the It is possible that this coincides with the Late Bronze Striplands Site’s Bronze Age pottery assemblage with Age/Early Iron Age boundary. The upper part of that settlement status and somehow consider it a place of monolith records a return to arable activity (53cm; ‘special’ gathering or the like. Directly arising as a cereal pollen present at 1.75%), the clearance of hazel result of the survival of midden deposits within the scrub and some evidence that the landscape again be- upper profiles of its two main wells, what this rather came slightly wetter as alder and bur-reed expanded. attests to is the degree of settlement-data loss that usu- Some caution is needed in interpreting these results ally is incurred with the plough-eradication of surface since the statistically desirable main pollen sum of strata on sites of the period. There is, indeed, often a 300 grains was not reached in any of the samples. distinct split between its main settlement-types. On Little can be deduced from the basal sediments the one hand, there are the great midden sites, such from F.71, since the pollen was so sparse and badly as Runnymede and Potterne (e.g. Needham & Spence preserved. The basal sediments appear to record 1997; Lawson 2000), wherein vast quantities of mate- grassland and disturbed ground; however, the rial were accumulated/deposited. On the other hand, sample from 49cm seems to mark immense local lacking, for example, the house-eavesgullies charac- landscape disturbance. Arable agriculture does not teristic of Middle/later Iron Age settlements, most appear to be present, and many of the herbs suggest of the period’s typical sites yield only relatively low a tall herb meadow environment. Hazel scrub grew quantities of finds. The assemblages from either of nearby, and apart from the presence of alder, there is Striplands’ two main wells alone would, in fact, be nothing to suggest particularly wet or damp condi- significantly greater than those found at many such tions. The lack of water here may be the reason that later Bronze Age settlements and, as such, potentially the lower sediments in this pit are so badly oxidised. offers a connection between the two. This being said, The pollen assemblages from the F.526 sequences the paucity of material of this date within the site’s are rather similar with grass-dominated spectra, and subsequent post-Bronze Age linear features (i.e. re- arboreal taxa such as hazel, oak, alder and willow sidual status) would indicate that it was not a matter (Figs. 9 & 21). It is clear that they do not represent the of settlement-wide midden spreads, but rather that typical ‘post-clearance’ later Bonze Age landscape. these were localised. The persistent presence of hazel (up to 22%) indicates In contrast, the results of the excavation of a later shrubby woodland nearby (perhaps managed cop- Bronze Age settlement cluster at Toll House, Broom, pice), and the low frequencies of oak even hint that Beds., are particularly relevant in this regard (Cooper fragments of mixed oak woodland still survived in & Edmonds 2007, 106–14). Exposed over c. 0.25ha, 38 Christopher Evans and Ricky Patten

Figure 21. Pollen Diagrams (F.210 & F.526). with its single post-built roundhouse, four-posters, All told, 957 sherds of pottery were recovered from fence-lines and scattering of small pits, the site has it, representing a minimum of 52 vessels. Aside from a ‘pristine’ quality (i.e. single occupation-phase) and the fact that the character of some of its pit infillings seemingly presents a typical household of the period. clearly pointed to the redeposition of midden material An Inland Bronze Age: Excavations at Striplands Farm, West Longstanton 39

(Brudenell & Cooper 2008), that the centre of the site of bronze metalworking. This includes Fengate (Pryor was crossed by an intensively sample-dug Romano- 1980; 1996) and, nearer at hand, Barleycroft Farm on British ditch permits consideration – through the the lower Ouse (Evans & Knight 2000). Attesting to distribution of residual later Bronze Age finds – of the impact of production-related recycling, while the its otherwise missing surface deposits. Based on the recovery of these items at the Striplands Site – in ad- plotted densities (Cooper & Edmonds 2007, fig. 4.24), dition to the evidence of its wooden haft-handles and its midden must have lain on the southern side of many toolmarks (from some 20 axes; see Table 6) – the cluster’s roundhouse and, extended across some certainly tells of the presence of bronze implements, 13.00m, its pottery values ranged from 27–56 sherds no contemporary metalwork was itself found.9 per metre segment-length (animal bone, 19–24 frag- While the perforated mussel shell necklace from ments). With an average of 40 sherds per metre (and 21 pit-well F.71 (et al.) is amongst the site’s more fragile, if animal bones), these densities would be broadly com- not modest, artefacts, it is actually one of its most in- parable to those of Striplands’ midden horizons.7 By formative. It is comparable to findings from other ex- this, and the estimation that the Toll House’s midden cavations of the period within the region, which now may have extended over some 125sqm, it would, in includes a six-cockle shell (plus one whelk) setting total, have held upwards of some 5000 sherds of pot- from Tower’s End, Thorney (Mudd & Pears 2008, 71, tery and 2625 animal bones (see above for Brudenell’s pl. 12) and a group of three, similarly modified cock- calculation of the two sites’ vessel counts).8 les from Langtoft, Lincs. (Hutton 2008c; see Evans et Not only does this serve to gauge Striplands’ two al. 2009, fig. 2.24).10 Aside from adding to the evidence well-middens – each broadly equivalent to, or even of the degree to which individuals were then various- less than, a single household’s refuse and not attest ly ‘ornamented’ – particularly, the growing corpus of to any kind of en masse group-deposition/-behav- jet toggles and animal-tooth pendants (see Evans et al. iour – but also acts as a cautionary tale. The mate- forthcoming; see also e.g. Woodward 2002) – what is rial respectively recovered from the two settlements singularly pertinent is the use of mussel shell. It both without these midden deposits would then represent attests to major river valley contacts by the ‘inland’ only 13% of their total populations in the case of Striplands’ community and, also, markedly contrasts Striplands Farm (pottery, by number; bone, 49%) and with the use of cockle shell in the South Lincs. and c. 15% at the Toll House (pottery, by number, exclud- Thorney environs. As a marine species, the latter ing residual finds). This is an enormous discrepancy would resonate with salt production in those areas and implies that interpretative modesty must be ex- and their contemporary estuarine conditions (see ercised towards such Late Bronze Age sites if lacking e.g. Gurney 1980; Lane & Morris 2001; Daniel 2009, surface strata. The gulf between what little material 156), and even suggest that variation in such necklace ultimately ended up in their cut features, as opposed ’markers’ was environmentally sensitive. to what otherwise went into midden heaps – in short, As regards the human remains, the occurrence of the missing – is simply too great for ‘totalising’ modes both ‘loose’ body parts (e.g. skull fragments in F.13 & of social/depositional explanation (e.g. Brück 2007). F.71) and cremations within settlements of the period Beyond this, the Striplands’ findings provide a plat- is now well-documented (e.g. Brück 1995). In this in- form to reconsider the role of organic material within stance, the F.2 cremation is noteworthy, not just for the the material culture of later prehistory. The inventory possible inclusion of plant food-offerings in its rite, of the organic finds from its pit-wells would confirm but also its shell fragments. With the latter not occur- the observations of a 1989 paper overviewing the re- ring in any of the site’s other contexts (see de Vareilles, covery of such finds up to that timevis-à-vis a critique above), they could suggest that still another necklace of Clark’s notion that non-waterlogged assemblages shell-setting accompanied the interred individual. only amounts to a pale ‘shadow-world’ of the oth- As indicated on Fig. 22, the site’s human remains erwise missing organic finds (e.g. Clark & Godwin occurred across the southern half of the Bronze Age 1940, 57; c.f. Evans 1989). Yes, organic containers were settlement zone and, arguably, beyond its building recovered – the F.504/526’s trough and F.13’s possible posthole- and midden-defined ‘core’. Also shown bark box/tray – but in nothing like the frequency of on that illustration are the pit-wells’ shared ‘axe- those features’ ceramic vessels. Equally, none of the signature’ linkages. As designated by Taylor above, organic finds recovered have been ornately carved though there can be no absolute certainty of their and it is clearly erroneous to envisage later British uniquely individual attribution, this potentially pro- prehistory as some manner of all-over-decorated vides distinct insights into site’s settlement dynam- ‘Polynesia’. The main organic finds are, moreover, ics and feature contemporaneity. This first involved ‘things’ that could not be rendered – largely due to listing which toolmark-axes occurred within which their tensile qualities/needs – in non-organic materi- pit-well. Not surprising, the two very large midden- als (log ladders and axe hafts) and, now, this is to the capped ones have the greatest number (F.504/526: 10 point that the recovery of such items are themselves and F.210: 9), followed by F.370 and F.71–3 with three fast becoming commonplace on sites of the period. and four respectively and, finally, F.13, having only Of the site’s other findings, the recovery of the cop- two. The link-lines on Fig. 22 indicate which axe-sig- per alloy droplet-adhering crucible piece, as well as natures are common to individual pit-wells. Again, the possible mould fragment, add to growing region- not surprisingly, with three such linkages each, it is al corpus of the period’s settlements having evidence the largest midden-sealed wells – F.504/526 and F.210 40 Christopher Evans and Ricky Patten

Figure 22. The Bronze Age settlement: human bone distributions and shared ‘axe-signatures’.

– that have the most connections. Possibly attesting to Fig. 3), no evidence of site-/environs-wide fieldsystem their more settlement-marginal situation, F.71–3 and was forthcoming; nor has such been found on other F.370 are both connected to only one other well. Yet, neighbouring investigations. From this, it could be the latter’s ‘pairing’ with F.210, along with F.504/526 inferred that large-scale fieldsystem-division was not and F.210’s, are the site’s strongest indications of con- essentially an attribute of Late Bronze Age land-use, temporaneity as only these shared more than more but was rather an earlier, Middle Bronze Age phenom- axe-signature (two each: Axes 8 & 16 and 11 & 4 re- enon. While there are instances of distinctly 'Late’- spectively). Finally in this capacity, and probably fur- attributed fieldsystems, such as at South Hornchurch, ther attesting to the earlier establishment of F.504/526 Essex (Guttmann & Last 2000; see also Yates 2007, in the north, no such linkages occurred with its pri- 26–8, fig. 3.6 & pl. 4), generally it is a matter of Late mary-phase (F.530) toolmark-axes, but only with its Bronze Age settlement occurring within the axes of recut-phases. fieldsystems established some centuries earlier. This would be the case, for example, at Fengate and, as is Pioneering Communities? – Colonising Claylands explored at length within a recent volume concerned with its environs (Evans et al. 2009; see also Daniel The Striplands Site is informative concerning the 2009, 53–4, fig. 3.49), the issue becomes to what degree character of later Bronze Age settlement and land-use Late Bronze Age settlement was there incidentally specifically because it seemingly lacked any major sited – perhaps as a lingering remnant – or how the Middle Bronze Age precursor. Although, as is so then-fossilised (by hedges?) fieldsystem landscape often the case with negative evidence certainty is not was actively utilised? While the site’s wood and wa- possible, and while a paddock setting was recovered terlogged plant remains assemblages hint of hedging in Area E (and a single ditch ‘fragment’ within Area 1; (see Taylor and de Vareilles above), the evidence is far An Inland Bronze Age: Excavations at Striplands Farm, West Longstanton 41 from being unequivocal. the Deverel Rimbury pottery occurring nearby and In this vein, it is crucial to recognise how this in- distinguish this usage as the Late Bronze Age settle- land landscape would have differed from the river ment’s likely precursor. Admittedly little can be said valley and fen-edge environs where such settlements concerning its character, and it may have amounted are usually encountered; primarily, it would have to no more than seasonal resource procurement and/ been ‘monument-less’. Although a few ring-ditch/ or even involved temporary pastoral utilisation (the barrow candidates are suggested by cropmarks on area perhaps first seeing limited clearance during the lighter soils flanking Oakington Brook some the later Neolithic/Early Bronze Age as hinted by 3km to the southeast (Evans et al. 2008, fig. 3.20), this the Beaker ‘presence’). It should, moreover, be em- would have effectively been new lands with few obvi- phasised that this ‘life in woods-type’ scenario (see ous vestiges of any previous inhabitants/’visitors’. Evans et al. 1999) would not just pertain to the site’s If evidence of such an ‘inland’ Bronze Age settle- pioneering phase. The Late Bronze Age settlement’s ment had been found 20 years ago or more before much evident roundwood and timbers certainly at- there would have been a natural inclination to, de tests to managed woodland within the vicinity and facto, ascribe it a pastoralist function (see Evans 1987 ‘the wild’ within its faunal assemblage – especially for overview). Indeed, prior to the Iron Age the main the boar – even suggesting local forest survival. incursions into the region’s ‘heavy lands’ may well A note of caution needs, however, to be introduced have been for woodland resource procurement and, to these ‘pioneering-phase’ arguments. It is here im- perhaps, involved a distinct stock-herding compo- agined that any pre-11/10th century BC occupation nent. In case of this site’s Late Bronze Age, however, could only have been sporadic and of low intensity. it is clear that its inhabitants practiced mixed farming Yet, as has been discussed elsewhere (Evans et al. and that it was a matter of permanent settlement. This 2009) – though corresponding with ‘the fieldsystem is not just demonstrated by its quernstones and ce- horizon’ – contemporary Middle Bronze Age/Deverel real remains – the latter, of course, could have always Rimbury Ware settlements are still relative rare in been imported to the area – but by the pollen register much of the region and, even when identified, often of its well features. have only low levels of accompanying pottery. In fact, Occurring, where present, at a level of c. 1–3%, by the occurrence of such urns in the period’s cre- while the level of cereal pollen may not seem par- mation burials, it has been suggested that from what ticularly high, it is comparable to and even exceeds was possibly a low/near-aceramic level of pottery-us- that on many Middle/Late Bronze Age sites (see age, the nature of their burial rites may itself impact Evans et al. 2009, 63–4; e.g. Branch & Silva in Mudd & upon the recognition of these settlements. Given this, Pears 2008, 60). Indeed, it is in this capacity that the it is possible that from the 14–12th centuries BC (i.e. evidence of the site’s Saxo-Norman well becomes in- prior to the site’s ‘Late-phase’ usage and based on the formative (F.362). Sited at what would have been the F.530’s 1380–1330/1330–1120 cal. BC radiocarbon date; junction of ‘in-‘ and out-field plots, it evokes the kind Beta-280349) the area may have seen more intensive of thoroughly domesticated land-use setting that can settlement than has actually registered. easily be envisaged. Yet, within it, cereal pollen only That issue aside, the early occupation of the re- occurred up to a levels of 9–16% and, against this, gion’s ‘heavy lands’ has received considerable atten- the Bronze Age wells’ values – taking the impact of a tion in recent years (e.g. Clay 2002; Mills 2007), with further c. 20 centuries of decay into account – seems the Middle Iron Age generally marking its main broadly comparable. settlement-colonisation horizon (as opposed to ear- The crucial issue behind this, of course, is wheth- lier task-related ‘visitations’ as indicated by widely er the site’s Bronze Age usage actually commenced dispersed worked flints and, occasionally, pottery; with its fully fledged/permanent ‘Late-period’ settle- see e.g. Evans 2002). This was, indeed, the case with ment – which based on its ceramics could not date the Longstanton/Northstowe fieldwork. Extending in earlier than the 11/10th centuries BC – or if it was ini- total over some 650ha, there 15 Middle/later Iron Age tiated through earlier forays into the local landscape. and nine Romano-British sites were discovered (see In other words, when was the site’s pioneering phase? Evans et al. 2008, 174–81). While a few seemingly iso- Leaving aside for the moment its single Beaker sherd, lated later Bronze/Early Iron Age pits were recovered here a number of factors are relevant: the marked (and two distinct later Mesolithic flint scatters on the concentration of flint within F.504/526’s upper mid- lighter soils flanking Oakington Brook; ibid., 176), the den fills and that four sherds of Deverel Rimbury Striplands settlement was the only substantive pre- pottery occurred only within pit F.505 beside that fea- Iron Age site found (see also Abrams & Ingham 2008 ture. Equally, as detailed by Boreham above, that the and Wright et al. 2009 further on local clayland site-re- northern pit-well’s pollen demonstrated both the per- covery). That said, large-scale landscape projects are sistence of shrubby wood and possibly even mixed now, for the first time, coming upon both later Bronze oak woodland, would either indicate the later surviv- and Early Iron Age sites upon the region’s claylands. al of woodland in that direction or else that feature’s This would include findings made in the course of somewhat earlier date. By its character, F.504/526’s the University-lands’ North West Cambridge evalua- flintwork is unlikely to pre-date the Middle Bronze tion (Evans & Newman 2010), through Cambourne’s Age (i.e. lack of distinct Early Bronze Age types) and, excavation programme (Wright et al. 2009, 65–6) and therefore, it is reasonable to directly associate it with even, at Papworth Everard, a Middle Bronze Age cre- 42 Christopher Evans and Ricky Patten mation cemetery (Gilmour et al. 2010; see also Cooke taken by Donald Horne, with its digitisation done et al. 2008, fig. 4.41 for Bronze Age settlement densi- by Iain Forbes. The paper’s graphics reflect the well- ties on Stansted’s claylands). honed skills of Andy Hall and Vicki Herring, with The location of the Striplands settlement – at Dave Webb undertaking much of the site photog- the interface between an inland gravel ridge and raphy and all of its studio imagery; also, Grahame clays – reflects detailed ‘local knowledge’. Potentially Appleby greatly helped in the final organisation of gleaned through observation of surface-drainage this text. and the tree-throw upcast, this would have accrued Latterly, for the provision of relevant information through previous forays to these inlands from ‘host’ or on-/off-site discussions generally, Charly French, river valley settlements (with the site’s shell necklace Kasia Gdaniec, Stuart Needham, Francis Pryor, Andy speaking of maintenance of these interconnections). Richmond, Ben Roberts, Niall Sharples and Ann Ultimately, given the site’s ‘interior’ situation, how Woodward, are all here duly thanked. Matt Brudenell water was regularly achieved (i.e. the ‘invention’ of the notes that the figures for the Fordham Bypass and pit-well) may have been as much a factor restricting Stonea have been calculated from a reassessment settlement as the heaviness of the local soils. To wit, of the two sites’ pottery and that he is grateful to the Longstanton/Oakington environs offers signifi- Richard Mortimer (OA East) and staff at the British cant insights concerning the geological vs. the topo- Museum for allowing him access to the material. graphic possibilities of early land-use and settlement, Finally, at Striplands Farm – the Shephards – were as it is not just a clayland-scape. Its Ampthill Clays are most charming hosts and, putting up with much crossed by a 700–1200m-wide gravel ridge that, albeit ‘messing around’, were truly instrumental in the interrupted, runs from Cambridge northwest to the project’s success (their son often gaining muddy ex- fens at Willingham. Whilst seeing somewhat high- perience with the digging teams). er background worked flint densities than the sur- rounding clays, despite lighter soils it evidently lacks the intense Neolithic/Bronze Age archaeology – vari- End-notes ously, the fieldsystems, flint scatter/pit cluster settle- ments and monument complexes – of, for example, 1. Prior to trenching, large-scale transect fieldwalking collec- the adjacent reaches of the Ouse River Valley (see e.g. tions occurred throughout the broader West Longstanton Evans & Knight 2000; Malim 2000). Presuming that area. Due to pasture cover, for our immediate purposes the existence of the ridge was then known through this only extended into the northern third of the site (Areas D & E); however, with only four burnt flints and previous procurement visits, this then tells of the rec- a single worked flint recovered there (and no prehistoric ommendation of land. Clearly, prior to the Middle Iron pottery), the site was not distinguishable within in the Age it was not just a matter of seeking better-drained plough-zone. Nor were any features associated with it lands (i.e. gravel terrace-geology), but that major river found during the course of evaluation trial trenching ei- valleys, in addition to offering ready water supply, ther along its northern margin (Cessford & Mackay 2004) were effectively landscape communication corridors. or within the east-lying fields (Cutler 2000; Ellis & Ratkai Against this, how the region’s inland tracts were first 2001). ‘pioneered’ and subsequently colonised are themes 2. This north-of-cables swathe was not to be built upon; the certainly warranting much further research. reason for excavating the pit-well there – the one such feature revealed through the geophysics – only arose from the threat of construction-related de-watering. Acknowledgements 3. Such large pit-wells continued as a feature of earlier Iron Age settlements, but declined in use during the Middle/ later phases of that period – this being attributable to the The CAU are sincerely grateful to the inspired co-op- fact that the large ditch enclosures of that time seem to eration shown throughout the project by the develop- have also served as ‘catchwaters’ (see Evans 1997). Of ers, Gallaghers (West Longstanton Ltd.); particularly, such Early Iron Age wells, the nearest example would from the outset, David Hunt and Andrew Lawson, be that at Lingwood Farm, Cottenham (Evans 1999). and latterly, Andrew Hawkes and Steve Riley. The Excavated during the Fenland Management Programme, truly positive contribution made to the fieldwork this evidently stake-supported wattle-revetted feature programme by the Company’s WSP Archaeological yielded more than 175 pottery sherds and 320 animal Consultants, Helen Davis, James Meek and Sally bones. Almost 500 pieces of wood were also recovered Randell, must also be acknowledged, as should also and, while largely consisting of roundwood and work- be that of Andy Thomas of Cambridgeshire County ing debris, also included a large plank, the ‘hollow’ from what was probably either a bowl, scoop or ladle, and, re- Council (Archaeological Development Control). markably, part of a tripartite disc wheel. Both Evans and Patten wish to thank the input of 4. Cattle hoof prints were identified around earlier Bronze the site’s other sometime directors – Jacqui Hutton, Age watering holes/ponds at Bradley Fen, Whittlesey Mark Knight and Duncan Mackay – and, too, the and, in one instance, a preserved wattle fence had been many site assistants who participated, often in thor- erected around the mouth of a well-shaft, presumably oughly wet conditions. At the CAU’s offices, first to keep animals away from a human supply (Gibson & Gwladys Monteil and, then, Jason Hawkes and their Knight 2006); see also Masefieldet al. 2003 and Lewis et al. teams processed and managed the site’s finds with 2006, 133–49 further later Bronze Age pit-wells generally. admirable efficiency; the site’s surveying was under- 5. The numerical designation of toolmarks indicates the An Inland Bronze Age: Excavations at Striplands Farm, West Longstanton 43

maximum ‘width:depth’ of the axe blade/cut expressed 297–319. in millimetres. Brown, N 1988 A Late Bronze Age Enclosure at Lofts Farm, 6. Due to page-length restriction, it is not possible to include Essex. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 54: 249–302. here details of the specialist contributions methodological Brück, J 1995 A place for the dead: the role of human procedures and classificatory basis; these are, however, remains in the Late Bronze Age. Proceedings of the available in the site’s archives. Prehistoric Society 61: 245–277. 7. While the negative evidence from such sampling of later- Brück, J 2007 The character of Late Bronze Age settlement phase linears at Striplands Farm for residual find densi- in southern Britain, in C Haselgrove and R Pope (ed.), ties (as opposed to the Toll House results) must, in part, The Earlier Iron Age in Britain and the near Continent: relate to the absence of settlement-wide midden-type 24–38. Oxford: Oxbow Books. strata, the site’s much heavier soils was probably also in- Brudenell, M 2008 Late Bronze Age pottery, in C fluential, as they would inhibit weathering-induced finds Evans, with D Mackay and L Webley, Borderlands movement. – The Archaeology of the Addenbrooke’s Environs, South Cambridge. (CAU Landscape Archives: New 8. Though its figures are likely to have been enhanced Archaeologies of the Cambridge Region Series.): 35–39. by the subsequent reuse of its surfaces as a yard, these Cambridge/Oxford: Cambridge Archaeological Unit/ artefact-population estimates are broadly comparable Oxbow Books with the finds recovered in associated with the main . Brudenell, M and Cooper, A 2008 Post-Middenism: eavesgully-surrounded Building 4 roundhouse (c. 9.0m Depositional Histories on Later Bronze Age wall-diam.) in the Haddenham V Middle Iron Age en- Settlements at Broom, Bedfordshire. Oxford Journal of closure and whose accompanying floor strata survived Archaeology 27: 15–36. intact: 6324 pottery sherds and 7058 animal bones (Evans Cartwright, C 1996 Pierced Oyster Shells, in RPJ Jackson & & Hodder 2006, 142–6). When considered together with TW Potter, Excavations at Stonea, Cambridgeshire 1980– the Toll House’s estimates, this suggests that 6000–7000 85: 538–540. London: British Museum Press sherds might represent a reasonable single, later prehis- . Cessford, C and Mackay, D 2004 Cambridgeshire Guided toric household pottery-population figure. Busway: A Series of Archaeological Evaluations. CAU 9. See Evans 2002 concerning the distributional context of Report 591. Bronze Age metalwork on the region’s claylands and, Clark, JGD and Godwin, H 1940 A Late Bronze Age find also, for example, Yates & Bradley 2010 and Malim 2010, near Stuntney, Isle of Ely. The Antiquaries Journal 20: generally. The site’s woodworking remains also provides 52–71. significant insights into the specialised character of pe- Clay, P 2002 The prehistory of the East Midlands claylands: riod’s craft production. Complementing the small size aspects of settlement and land-use from the Mesolithic to of the WD13’s probable wooden haft, in particular is the the Iron Age in central England. (Leicester Archaeology range of the axes-sizes employed, with four being less Monograph 9.) Leicester: University of Leicester than 30mm wide and, all told, four different axes were Archaeological Services. used in the manufacture of the WD65 trough. Cooke, N, Brown, F and Phillpotts, C 2008 From 10. Four perforated oyster shells (Ostrea edulis) were re- Hunter Gatherers to Huntsmen: A History of the covered from different Late Roman contexts at Stonea. Stansted Landscape. Oxford & Salisbury: Framework While two were thought to perhaps relate to roof-repair Archaeology. patching, the others were considered to have probably Cooper, A and Edmonds, M 2007 Past and Present. been used for costume decoration or personal ornament Excavations at Broom, Bedfordshire 1996–2005. (Cartwright in Jackson & Potter 1996, 538–40, fig. 201). Cambridge: Cambridge Archaeological Unit. Also, a perforated ‘sea-shell’ (limpet) accompanied an Cunliffe, B 1974. Iron Age communities in Britain: an account Early Bronze Age child’s burial at Pode Hole, Thorney of England, Scotland and Wales from the seventh century (Richmond et al. 2010). BC unit the Roman Conquest. (First edition). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Cutler, R 2000 Home Farm, Longstanton, Cambridgeshire: Archaeological Evaluation. Birmingham University Field Bibliography Archaeology Unit Report 699. Daniel, P 2009 Archaeological Excavation at Pode Hole Quarry: Striplands Farm Reports Bronze Age occupation on the Cambridgeshire Fen-edge. Evans, C and Mackay, D 2004. Longstanton, Cambridgeshire – (British Archaeological Reports British Series 484) A Village Hinterland – Archaeological Investigations, 2004. Oxford: Archaeopress. Cambridge Archaeological Unit (CAU) Report 696. Earwood, C 1993 Domestic Wooden Artefacts in Britain and Patten, R and Evans, C 2005 Striplands Farm, West Ireland from Neolithic to Viking times. Exeter: University Longstanton, Cambridgeshire: An Archaeological of Exeter Press. Excavation. CAU Report 703. Ellis, R and Ratkai S 2001 Late Saxon and Medieval Mackay, D and Knight, M 2007 Further Excavations at Remains at Longstanton, Cambridgeshire, in P Ellis, Striplands Farm, West Longstanton, Cambridgeshire. CAU G Coates and R Cutler, Four Sites in Cambridgeshire: Report 764. Excavations at Pode Hall Farm, Paston, Longstanton Hutton, J 2009 Further Excavations at Striplands Farm, and Bassingbourn, 1996–7. (Birmingham University Longstanton. CAU Report 900. Field Archaeology Unit Monograph Series 4/ Other References British Archaeological Reports 322): 63–103. Oxford: Abrams, J and Ingham, D 2008 Farming on the Edge: Archaeopress. Archaeological Evidence from the Clay Uplands to the West Evans, C 1987 'Nomads in Waterland'? – Prehistoric tran- of Cambridge. East Anglian Archaeology Report No. shumance and Fenland archaeology. Proceedings of the 123. Bedford: Albion Archaeology. Cambridge Antiquarian Society (PCAS) 76: 27–39. Barrett, J 1980 The pottery of the later Bronze Age in low- Evans, C 1989 Perishables and Worldly Goods: Artefact land England. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 46: 44 Christopher Evans and Ricky Patten

decoration and classification in the light of recent wet- Landscape at South Hornchurch, Essex. Proceedings of lands research. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 8: 179–201. the Prehistoric Society 66: 319–59. Evans, C 1997 Hydraulic Communities: Iron Age Enclosure Hambleton, E 2009 Review of Middle Bronze Age–Late in the East Anglian Fenlands, in A Gwilt and C Iron Age faunal Assemblages from Southern Britain. Haselgrove (eds), Reconstructing Iron Age Societies: New Research Department Report Series number 71–2008. Approaches to the British Iron Age. (Oxbow Monograph Bournemouth: English Heritage & Bournemouth 71): 216–227. Oxford: Oxbow Books. University. Evans, C 1999 The Lingwood Wells: A waterlogged Herne, A 1992 The lithic assemblage, in I Longworth, A first millennium BC settlement at Cottenham, Herne, G Varndell and S Needham, Excavations at Cambridgeshire. PCAS 87: 11–30. Grimes Graves, Norfolk, 1972–1976 (Fascicule 3): 21–93. Evans, C 2002 Metalwork and ‘Cold Claylands’: Pre-Iron London: British Museum. Age occupation on the Isle of Ely, in T Lane and J Coles Hutton, J 2008a Excavations at Langtoft, Lincolnshire: The (ed.), Through Wet and Dry: Proceedings of a conference in Glebe Land. CAU Report 837. honour of David Hall. (Lincolnshire Archaeology and Hutton, J 2008b Excavations at Langtoft, Lincolnshire: The Heritage Reports Series No. 5 and WARP Occasional Freeman Land. CAU Report 838. Paper 17): 33–53. Lincoln: The Heritage Trust of Hutton, J 2008c Excavations at Langtoft, Lincolnshire: The Lincolnshire and WARP. Whitfield Land. CAU Report 823. Evans, C and Hodder, I 2006 Marshland Communities Knight, M 1998 The Archaeological Investigation of the Anglian and Cultural Landscape: The Haddenham Project (II). Water Northborough to Etton Watermain and Excavation (McDonald Institute Monograph.) Cambridge: of a Terminal Bronze Age Settlement at Nine Bridges. CAU McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research. Report 287. Evans, C and Knight, M. 2000 A Fenland Delta: Later Lane, T and Morris, E (ed.) 2001 A Millennium of Saltmaking: Prehistoric land-use in the lower Ouse Reaches, in M Prehistoric and Romano-British Salt Production in the Dawson (ed.), Prehistoric, Roman and Saxon landscape Fenland. (Lincolnshire Archaeology and Heritage studies in the Great Ouse Valley. (Council for British Reports Series No. 4.) Lincoln: Heritage Trust for Archaeology Research Report 119): 89–106. York: Lincolnshire. Council for British Archaeology Research. Lawson, AJ 2000 Potterne 1982–1985: Animal Husbandry in Evans, C, Knight, M and Webley L 2007 Iron Age Later Prehistoric Wiltshire. Wessex Archaeology Report Settlement and Romanization on the Isle of Ely: The No. 17. Hurst Lane Reservoir Site. PCAS 96: 41–78. Legge, AJ 1992 Excavations at Grimes Graves Norfolk 1972– Evans, C and Newman, R 2010 North West Cambridge, 1976: Fascicule 4 Animals, Environment and the Bronze Age University of Cambridge: Archaeological Evaluation Economy. London: British Museum Press. Fieldwork. CAU Report 921. Lewis, J, Brown, F, Batt, A, Cooke, N, Barrett, J, Every, R, Evans, C, Pollard, J and Knight, M 1999 Life in Woods: Mepham, L, Brown, K, Cramp, K, Lawson, AJ, Roe, Tree-throws, 'settlement' and forest cognition. Oxford F, Allen, S, Petts, D, McKinley, JL, Carruthers, WJ, Journal of Archaeology 18: 241–254. Challinor, D, Wiltshire, P, Robinson, M, Lerwis, HA Evans, C, with Beadsmoore, E, Brudenell, M and Lucas, and Bates, MR. 2006 Landscape Evolution in the Middle G 2009 Fengate Revisited: Further Fen-edge Excavations, Thames Valley: Heathrow Terminal 5 Excavations Volume Bronze Age Fieldsystems/Settlement and the Wyman 1, Perry Oaks. (Framework Archaeology Monograph 1) Abbott/Leeds Archives. Cambridge: Cambridge Oxford and Salisbury: Framework Archaeology. Archaeological Unit/Oxbow Books. Locker, A 2000 Animal bone in AJ Lawson. Potterne 1982– Evans, C, with Mackay, D and Webley, L 2008 Borderlands – 1985: Animal Husbandry in Later Prehistoric Wiltshire. The Archaeology of the Addenbrooke’s Environs, Wessex Archaeology Report No. 17. South Cambridge. (CAU Landscape Archives: New Malim, T 2000 The ritual landscape of the Neolithic and Archaeologies of the Cambridge Region Series.) Bronze Age along the middle and lower Ouse Valley, Cambridge/Oxford: Cambridge Archaeological Unit/ in M Dawson (ed.), Prehistoric, Roman and Post-Roman Oxbow Books. Landscapes of the Great Ouse Valley. (Council for British Evans, C, with Appleby, G, Lucy, S and Regan, R. Archaeology Research Report 119.): 57–88. York: Forthcoming. Process and History: Prehistoric and Council for British Archaeology. Roman Fen-edge Communities at Colne Fen, Earith (The Malim, T 2010 The environmental and social context of the Archaeology of the Lower Ouse Valley, Volume I/McDonald Isleham hoard. Antiquaries Journal 90: 73–130. Institute Monograph.) Cambridge: McDonald Institute Masefield, R, Branch, NP, Couldrey, P, Goodburn, D and for Archaeological Research. Tyers, I 2003 A Later Bronze Age well complex at Ford, HS, Bradley, R, Hawkes, J and Fisher, P 1984 Flint- Swalecliffe, Kent. The Antiquaries Journal 83: 47–121. working in the Metal Age. Oxford Journal of Archaeology McKinley, J 1997 Bronze Age ‘barrows’ and funerary rites 3: 157–173. and rituals of cremation. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Forestry Commission 1956 Utilisation of Hazel Coppice. Society 63: 129–45. Bulletin 27: 33. McOmish, D 1996 East Chisenbury: ritual and rubbish at Gibson, D and Knight, M 2006 Bradley Fen Excavations the British Bronze Age-Iron Age transition. Antiquity 2001–2004, Whittlesey, Cambridgeshire. Cambridge: CAU 70: 68–76. Report 733. Mills, J 2007 Surveying the claylands: combining aerial Gilmour, N, Dodwell, N and Popescu, E 2010 A Middle survey and fieldwalking methods in identifying ar- Bronze Age Cremation Cemetery on the Western chaeological sites on ‘difficult’ soils, in Populating Clay Claylands at Papworth Everard. PCAS 99: 7–24. Landscapes, J Mills & R Palmer (ed.): 132–46 Stroud: Gurney, DA 1980 Evidence of Bronze Age salt-production Tempus. at Northey, Peterborough. Northamptonshire Archaeology Mudd, A and Pears, B 2008 Bronze Age Field System at 15: 1–11. Tower’s Fen, Thorney, Peterborough’ Excavations at Guttmann, E and Last, J 2000 A Late Bronze Age ‘Thorney Borrow Pit’, 2004–2005. (British Archaeological An Inland Bronze Age: Excavations at Striplands Farm, West Longstanton 45

Reports British Series 471) Oxford: Archaeopress. Common, Lincolnshire. Unpublished paper. Needham, SP 1995 A bowl from Maidscross, Suffolk: Cambridge Archaeological Unit. Burials with pottery in the Post Deverel Rimbury Webley, L Forthcoming. Excavations at Langtoft, Southern period, in I Kinnes and G Varndell, ‘Unbaked urns of Lincolnshire. rudely shape’: Essays on British and Irish pottery for Ian Webley, L and Hiller, J 2009 A fen island in the Neolithic Longworth. (Oxbow Monograph 55) Oxford: Oxbow: and Bronze Age: excavations at North Fen, Sutton. 159–71. PCAS 98: 37–46. Needham, SP 1996 Post Deverel Rimbury pottery, Woodward, A 2002 Beads and Beakers: heirlooms in the in R Jackson and T Potter, Excavations at Stonea, British Early Bronze Age. Antiquity 76: 1040–1047. Cambridgeshire, 1980–85. London: British Museum Wright, E 1990 The Ferriby boats: Seacraft of the Bronze Age. Press: 245–256. London: Routledge. Needham, SP and Spence, T 1997 Refuse and the formation Wright, J, Leivers, M, Smith RS, and Stevens, CJ. 2009. of middens. Antiquity 71: 77–90. Cambourne New Settlement: Iron Age and Romano-British Nicholson, K (et al.) forthcoming. Above the Fen-edge: Settlement on the Clay Uplands of West Cambridgeshire. Late Bronze Age to Early Iron Age and Early Romano- Wessex Archaeology Report No. 23. Salisbury: Wessex British Activity on Land off Broadlands, Peterborough. Archaeology. Archaeological Solutions. (unpublished paper). Yates, DT 2007 Land, Power and Prestige: Bronze Age Field Payne, S and Bull, G. 1988 Components of variation in Systems in Southern England. Oxford: Oxbow Books. measurements of pig bones and teeth, and the use of Yates, D and Bradley, R 2010 Still water, hidden depths: the measurements to distinguish wild from domestic pig deposition of Bronze Age metalwork in the English remains. Archaeozoologia 2: 27–66. Fenland. Antiquity 84: 405–415. PCRG 1997 The Study of Later Prehistoric Pottery: General Young, R and Humphrey, J 1999 Flint use in England after Policies and Guidelines for Analysis and Publication. the Bronze Age: time for a re-evaluation? Proceedings of (Prehistoric Ceramics Research Group occasional the Prehistoric Society 65: 231–242 Papers 1 and 2 second edition) Oxford: Prehistoric Ceramics Research Group. Pryor, F 1980 Excavation at Fengate, Peterborough, England: The Third Report. (Royal Ontario Museum Monograph 6/Northants Archaeological Monograph 1.) Northampton & Toronto: Royal Ontario Museum, Northants Archaeological Society. Pryor, F 1996 Sheep, stockyards and field systems: Bronze Age livestock populations in the Fenlands of eastern England. Antiquity 70: 313–24. Pryor, F 2001 Seahenge. London: Harper Collins. Rackham, D 2009. Animal bones, in P Daniel, Archaeological Excavations at Pode Hole Quarry: Bronze Age Occupation on the Cambridgeshire Fen-edge. (British Archaeological Reports British Series 484): 134–4 Oxford: Archaeopress. Richmond, A, Coates, G and Hallybone, C 2010 Bar Pasture Farm, Pode Hole, Peterborough: Phase 1 – Interim report. Phoenix Consulting Archaeology Ltd Report PC259a. Serjeantson, D 1996 The animal bones, in S Needham and T Spence (ed.). Runnymede Bridge Research Excavations (Vol. 2): Refuse and Disposal at Area 16 East, Runnymede: 194–223. London. British Museum. Serjeantson, D 2007 Intensification of animal husbandry in the Late Bronze Age? The contribution of sheep and pigs, in C Haselgrove and R Pope (ed.), The Earlier Iron Age in Britain and the near Continent: 80–93. Oxford: Oxbow. Sharples, N 2010 Social Relations in Later Prehistory: Wessex in the First Millennium BC. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Taylor, M 1998 Wood and bark from the enclosure ditch, in F Pryor, Etton – Excavations at a Neolithic causewayed enclosure near Maxey, Cambridgeshire 1982–7. (English Heritage Archaeological Report 18.) London: English Heritage. Taylor, M 2001 The Wood, in F Pryor, The Flag Fen Basin – Archaeology and Environment of a Fenland landscape: 167–228. London: English Heritage. Taylor, M 2010 Some notes on surviving hafts and handles, in F Pryor and M Bamforth, Flag Fen, Peterborough – Excavation and Research 1995–2007: 88–89. Oxford: Oxbow. Webley, L 2004 Middle Bronze Age finds at Langtoft Plate 1. Striplands Farm, Longstanton. Re-Colonisation: top, Francis Pryor and Maisie Taylor inspecting the F.71– 3/156 deposits in 2005 (with Evans and Patten, left and right); below, the same feature some four years later (August 2009), the stripped surface having been colonised by plants and with the Bronze Age pit-well seeing a second life as a pond.

Proceedings of the Cambridge Antiquarian Society C.